Want to play a necromancer, but worried about intraparty conflict

[juicytusk]

Hey y'all,

Title pretty much summarizes it. I want to play a lawful neutral necromancer wizard, but my party has a LG life cleric who's pretty averse to raising undead regardless of the intent because it's an insult to the balance of life and death.

How can I play the necromancer without having conflict in the party, or should I just ditch the idea and think of a different one?

Thanks!

[PhantomSoul]

I have a game with an unambiguously good(-intending) necromancer and things work out great. (Granted, she hasn't raised undead MUCH, but she's done it with the party fully aware.)

I think the ever-suggestion is the best one here -- talk to the player.

[zinycor]

Talk to the other players, make sure everyone is with it.

Inner party conflict can be super fun at the right time as long as everyone is into that and doesn't lead to OOC conflict.

[Edea]

I'd be worried less about in-character issues and more about your minions taking up battle time, honestly...

[Rentirith]

I'd suggest you develop some hard rules on what undead you raise, how many, who you raise, etc. That falls in line with the overall morality of your group.

If you all are murder hobos and the cleric is only anti undead because cleric reasons, then you could say you only animate people who attack the party. If there's lots of roleplay and intricate political intrigue, and your actions have consequences, then maybe only find the families of recently passed people, and offer them financial compensation for the use of their loved ones' bodies, and honor the laws of the town's and cities you visit. Stuff like that would give you a way to compromise with the party and let you do your spooky thang, while letting the cleric feel good about 'controlling' your evil.

You could also play it as a cynical scientist/doctor, simply using the resources at your disposal to survive in this imperfect world. Yeah, you don't like the smell of rotting flesh any more than the next guy, but you don't like being stabbed even more. Make your character reasonable and personable, and that cuts the argument from the cleric better than if you were a mustache twirling villain.

That will make your betrayal all the sweeter...

[Gtdead]

You need to talk both to the player (intentions beyond "me no like"), and the DM (setting and general perceptions about the undead). There was a story about a necromancer I heard on youtube, where the npcs wanted to be raised to fight another day, ala Eberron style (although the setting wasn't eberron).

If such a thing exists in your settings, then you might as well be the norm and the LG cleric be the odd one.

Also it's important to know what you are fighting against and why you are in a party. If it's about protecting a random caravan, things are expected to go sideways fast. If you are fighting a terrible evil or something, then tension is fine because you have a reason to actually be in the same party.

Other than that, I'm not sure what a necromancer can do to make it worthwhile (as in, to have fun playing it).. Also make sure you have a way to resolve attacks quickly. Waiting for minions to attack is boring and will wear you all down.

[MaxWilson]

Hey y'all,

Title pretty much summarizes it. I want to play a lawful neutral necromancer wizard, but my party has a LG life cleric who's pretty averse to raising undead regardless of the intent because it's an insult to the balance of life and death.

How can I play the necromancer without having conflict in the party, or should I just ditch the idea and think of a different one?

Thanks!

Is it specifically necromancy that attracts you, or do you just want the joy of minionmancy? You could play an Enchanter who uses Tiny Servants + Darkness or Fog Cloud (or Pyrotechnics, or Stinking Cloud, or torch-snuffing via Prestidigitation) to give his minions advantage (because blindsight).

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I'd be worried less about in-character issues and more about your minions taking up battle time, honestly...

Macros and automated rolls are the minionmancer best friend.

[Valmark]

Is it specifically necromancy that attracts you, or do you just want the joy of minionmancy? You could play an Enchanter who uses Tiny Servants + Darkness or Fog Cloud (or Pyrotechnics, or Stinking Cloud, or torch-snuffing via Prestidigitation) to give his minions advantage (because blindsight).

This, you don't need undeads if you just want to play a necromancer.

It can even be an interesting undead hunter at high levels, taking control of hostile undeads to make them stay still while the party kills them.

[Throne12]

So first of all you need to come up with a reason why your raising these blood thirsty creatures. No how I would tackle this problem. Is take a page out of the devils play book. I'll have contracts with people. Where I can use there souls and put them in to skeletons but only for so long or only x about of times. Then there contract is fullfied. You must attend these contracts with out using underhand or maliciously. This gets you to lawful neutral. You also must never let a undead lose. If one does you must destroy before it does any evil.


Also remember a dead body is considered an object so the spell animate object works on dead bodys.

[BoxANT]

I ran a LN cleric (knowledge) in a campaign who utilized animate dead regularly

I would only use animate dead if:

a) permission was granted via speak w dead, and a contract created, which usually involved a agreement to perform a proper burial after undead crevice was compelled (assuming remains still intact...)

b) the target had attempted to kill us first (when alive) thus already violating the law.

these requirements were enough to keep the necromancy both limited (usually never had more than 4 skeletons) and "not evil enough" to enrage the paladin.

[Naanomi]

One of our party members is a LN Elven Necromancer who knows how to keep his minions in line as safely as possible (it is his hermetic secret); and only uses the bodies of Orcs, Goblins, and other 'unredeemabley evil people'; on the assumption that their hellscape afterlives are not any worse than undeath is at the very least

[MaxWilson]

I ran a LN cleric (knowledge) in a campaign who utilized animate dead regularly

I would only use animate dead if:

a) permission was granted via speak w dead, and a contract created, which usually involved a agreement to perform a proper burial after undead crevice was compelled (assuming remains still intact...)

b) the target had attempted to kill us first (when alive) thus already violating the law.

these requirements were enough to keep the necromancy both limited (usually never had more than 4 skeletons) and "not evil enough" to enrage the paladin.

Is it (a) or (b), or (a) AND (b)?

[Lunali]

I would also suggest checking what necromancy actually means in the game world. By default it means imbuing a dead corpse with negative energy and/or binding a soul to it, either of which is pretty unambiguously evil. If it instead means using a spell similar to animate object to animate a dead corpse, it becomes considerably less objectionable. In the latter case, the spell should probably be altered so the creature collapses at the end instead of being released from control to go about it's evil ways.

[jjordan]

Hey y'all,

Title pretty much summarizes it. I want to play a lawful neutral necromancer wizard, but my party has a LG life cleric who's pretty averse to raising undead regardless of the intent because it's an insult to the balance of life and death.

How can I play the necromancer without having conflict in the party, or should I just ditch the idea and think of a different one?

Thanks! I ran a necromancer who was a young mad-scientist style doctor. Strong medical skills, a focus on healing people. Was always trying to heal people and would get very mad if people prevented him from doing it. Was also known to dissect dead enemies and spend hours making sketches of how their bodies worked. Might have vivisected a few enemies the party needed to question.

[Toadkiller]

I'd be worried less about in-character issues and more about your minions taking up battle time, honestly...

This. Familiars, summons and pets can be real time sucks. If it can be done as quick as an attack or spell, fine. If it 5 minutes of fiddling with position to optimize advantage and... yawn.

[BoxANT]

Is it (a) or (b), or (a) AND (b)?

a or b

find a old corpse? get permission

kill a murderous orc? free labor

[JackPhoenix]

find a old corpse? get permission

How do you get a permission from Speak with Dead? It explicitly doesn't let you contact the creature's soul, and non-sapient object can't make any decision to give you valid permission.

[ProsecutorGodot]

How do you get a permission from Speak with Dead? It explicitly doesn't let you contact the creature's soul, and non-sapient object can't make any decision to give you valid permission.

Seems like a fantastic moral hook for the DM to present the character with when someone who knows that witnesses the event.

I guess you could technically ask them "hey is it okay if I ruin your corpse, making it very difficult to restore you to proper life later so I can use you to win a fight?" and if that was something they'd actually thought of in life, they could answer. But then they still can't agree to any terms of a contract because they can't comprehend new information or current events since those events are happening after their death, oh and they can't agree to their own proper burial, especially under a condition that is occurring post mortem.

I'm curious now @BoxANT (and I mean this genuinely) was this a conscious decision you made for the character to be tricking those around them into believe this was consensual necromancy or did you (they) not know? I'd even find it believable that the Paladin could be fooled into this, Speak with Dead isn't in their wheelhouse.

Regardless of the reason, sounds like an interesting character.

On Topic: As always, ask the party up front if they're comfortable with the inevitable conflict that might arise. I believe there will always be a little bit of conflict with this decision, it's at best an evil leaning good intended act and all other times purely evil.

I've run a game with a player who insisted on playing a Necromancer, and I allowed it under the condition that the player tried not to be actively hostile to the players and acquiesced to any reasonable requests from another player if they didn't like their actions. It ended up not working out, the other players didn't mind that the character was a jerk who often refused to help them, they minded that the Necromancer took up extra time with their corpse gathering and subsequent turns in combat.

I see a few options here:
1 - Play the character regardless of the Clerics wishes and hope for the best
2 - Ask if the Cleric player is okay with it despite potential interpersonal conflicts your characters (hopefully not players) have with the idea
3 - Play a different character and save this Necromancer for a more suitable campaign

My hope is that option 2 works, but I think option 3 is generally the safest approach.

[BoxANT]

I'm curious now @BoxANT (and I mean this genuinely) was this a conscious decision you made for the character to be tricking those around them into believe this was consensual necromancy or did you (they) not know? I'd even find it believable that the Paladin could be fooled into this, Speak with Dead isn't in their wheelhouse.

Regardless of the reason, sounds like an interesting character.



being a LN (knowledge) cleric, following the letter of the law (rather than the spirit of the law) was essential.

if I was able to get the deceased to "agree" to a contract, signed and witnessed, then that morally absolved me of wrongdoing.

now I am sure some philosphers or theologians could raise questions, but when you are in the jungles of chult... they are in short supply