One school of magic. One year. What do you choose?

[SangoProduction]

Let's say that you have a game that's going to go on for a year. You have to cast exclusively from a singular school of spells (and you must cast at least some spells).
What is the most interesting school to be restricted to, in your opinion. And why? And let's ignore pseudo-casting, like shadow illusions which get to steal from non-illusion spells.

In my opinion, it would have to be the illusion, because there's a lot of room to play around even with just Silent Image. And there are more spells than just that. It is remarkably versatile, and so would keep from feeling too stale after a year. (On a mechanical level. A good character transcends mechanics. But there is only so much "I swing my sword," that I can personally handle.)

Also, those who are "immune" to illusions tend to be exceptionally rare, and are immune not to the spells themselves, but to the fact that they can't actually see your illusions. In which case you use ghost sound.

Downside? Needs DM buy-in. If your DM does not want to bugger with illusions, it is just utterly demoralizing to play an illusionist... which you ran across the DM well beforehand. And for some reason this attitude is remarkably common in roll20. And I hate it.


Conjuration is a very close second, for basically the same reason, except that their creations are corporeal. But that also means that they are better defined, and there is less freedom... wow. OK, let's not get philosophical. But this category almost never has a DM that just says "Yeah, no, I'm just ignoring that, screw your spell slot."

[Inevitability]

Conjuration, probably. Teleportation and summoning are unique effects that seem very fun to use, creation lets you get incredibly crazy depending on creativity, and if you really want to blast/buff/BFC that's an option as well. Just the most well-rounded school, and very little is immune to summoned sonics.

[Bullet06320]

comjuration

summon or call anything i need, if i need a spell i cant cast, something somewhere can cast it for me
if i need a beatstick, if i need something that can burrow, the options are endless, its all about utility and options

teleportation- anywhere i need to go, poof im there, if i dont need to be here, fast, poof im gone

creation just poof a wall of stone or salt or other stuff

and healing is in this school as well, not so much for wizards, but still...

Conjuration can be the most powerfull school just simply for the amount of options available, if you dont have it, just summon something that does

[Darg]

The enchantment school is extremely fun to play, but it also requires a DM that doesn't just throw immune creatures at you just because it can be an extremely strong school.

[Clause]

Necromancy OR abjuration.

The other schools have a infinity of beings that are imune or have protection versus.
Example: undeads are imune to ilusions, enchantment, etc. So mutch classes grant imunity to divination. Tons and tons of monsters are imune to some element(evocation). Thousands spells impede conjuration/teleport.

So... the most consistent choose, are necromancy or abjuration

[Curbludgeon]

Transmutation would be fun, especially if one leans into polymorph.

[Fiery Diamond]

Interesting, or fun to play? Those aren't the same thing for me. Interesting would have to be conjuration, transmutation, or illusion. Fun to play would be Evocation, because I love playing blaster casters. That's my jam.

[Thunder999]

Gotta be conjuration, you can base an entire character around just the Summon Monster line, but there's so much more that you don't have to.

[False God]

Evocation. Why? It's fun. Fireballs, Lightning Bolts, generally just fun in my book. Also some practical applications, such as starting fires in the woods, or a flare if you're lost, and ya know, blasting things.

Transmutation is probably my second choice. Again, lots of fun things to do and a lot of good practical applications.

[lylsyly]

one school only? Conjuration!

[Troacctid]

I'd pick evocation. Blowing things up is fun, and it means you'll always have something useful to do in combat.

[Ramza00]

Divination / Clairsentience is the path to gold, gold, GOLD

As Bebe Glazer teaches us


Quote from Goodnight, Seattle

Frasier: Bebe! What are you doing here?
Bebe: Your strategy worked, you genius.
Frasier: What strategy?
Bebe: Turning down the San Francisco job. They've offered you twenty percent more money, and thrown in a weekly TV gig on the morning news.
Frasier: Television? Well, that certainly sounds tempting, but, but my home is here. There are more important things than money.
Bebe: Yes, I know. There's power. But money can buy that.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I like Transmutation, because with the right setup, you can use alter self/polymorph/PAO/shapechange to become something that can do anything you want to do in other ways via Metamorphic Transfer, Assume Supernatural Ability, or (if Persisted) racial spellcasting. I like it better than Conjuration mainly because I'd rather do it myself and get it right on my own merits, rather than rely on the (potentially suspect) ability of another to do it for me.

Second is Illusion, if only because of a mix of the insane versatility of Conjuration with the control aspect of Transmutation. A lot of giant problems with it, though, mainly the aspects discussed earlier in the thread. Jerky DMs and lots of potential immunities.

Third is Conjuration, because even if I have to rely on another creature to do anything for me, at least anything can be done.

[pabelfly]

I'm torn between Evocation and Conjuration. I like blaster casters, and Evocation has Wings of Flurry, Fireball, Chain Lightning, Combust, etc,, but Conjuration has the Orb of Acid, etc spell lines.

[SangoProduction]

Wow there's actually remarkably high diversity of choices that well and truly shocks me. Even a divination thrown in there.

[Darg]

One thing that really bugs me, is that control/command plants/undead are transmutation/Necromancy. 100% fits the enchantment theme much better other than the whole "all enchantments are mind-affecting spells." This is especially true for charm and compulsion effects that are only by technicality not mind-affecting or charm/compulsion effects. Like the above spells which are 100% obviously affecting the minds of the creatures.

[lylsyly]

I was surprised there wasn't more votes for conjuration! Low levels you have melee, scouting and setting off traps. Mid levels you get into healing and some other slas that expand your versatility. High levels you actually can grab some casting that makes you even more versatile. I' just saying ;-)

[ciopo]

Transumation, for sure.

Second choice is illusion for me, but that's the "boring" displacement+mirror image combo, aka the "defensive" choice, even more than abjuration is, what with even silence thrown in!

[Ramza00]

I was surprised there wasn't more votes for conjuration! Low levels you have melee, scouting and setting off traps. Mid levels you get into healing and some other slas that expand your versatility. High levels you actually can grab some casting that makes you even more versatile. I' just saying ;-)

I picked Divination for manipulating time / fate / the future is one of the humans primal wishes

But seriously in 3.5 for the first 12 levels of the game Conjuration is incredible for a generalist, a specialist, or a focused specialist.

[aglondier]

Divination...and just be that know-it-all smartarse...I'm not a wizard, I drink and I know things...

[Elkad]

Conjuration.

From Caltrops to Gate it's just solid, with great choices at every level.

Battlefield control, damage, summoned monsters, transportation - it has it all.

[Fero]

I will go with abjuration. It can be a shockingly powerful school of magic but requires thought to use exclusively.

[Quertus]

What I would play in that scenario? Probably Transmutation. Or Necromancy. Pity that Cure spells are no longer considered Necromancy. Under the right GM, Universal could be interesting…

[SangoProduction]

You are literally the first person to mention Universal. lol.
Granted, most people see Universal as "not associated with schools" rather than a school in itself.

[Thunder999]

There's only 16 universal spells, and most of them don't actually do anything on their own (Permanency, Arcane Spellsurge, Greater arcane fusion, arcane fusion, Imbue Familiar with Spell ability, Arcane Conversion)
You're effectively just using Wish, Limited Wish, Prestidigitation, Arcane Mark, Dragoneye Rune, Familiar Pocket, Enhance Familiar, Fortify Familiar and Mystic Surge.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Abjuration. I like having dispels and the school has enough variety to keep things interesting.

[Darg]

Granted, most people see Universal as "not associated with schools" rather than a school in itself.

Because that is exactly what it is:


A small number of spells (arcane mark, limited wish, permanency, prestidigitation, and wish) are universal, belonging to no school.

[Quertus]

So, what would I be interested in playing in this scenario? In roughly the order in which I'd want them (pity about Universal):

Transmutation

The floor is lava, you're part of my insect collection, and the low-op Fighter gets to feel useful - those are just some of the big draws of Transmutation. Flight, Haste, and Teleport aren't bad, either. Even Entangle is Transmutation. Yes, there are creatures which are immune to your direct application of Transmutation against them (natural shapeshifters), which is why you go high-Knowledges Wizard to recognize those foes, and use indirect attacks, like "the floor is lava" against them. Or, if your GM feels it's wrong to let you just recognize a disguised shapeshifter just because you're that smart, just stick with buffs and indirect attacks - this school has plenty.

For added fun, this is definitely the school to be an Elan, and change your race to qualify for Beholder Mage or Illithid Savant.

If, say, you're starting at Epic level, a particularly fun thing to do here is to play a Cleric, and Polymorph your foes into forms you can control with Turn attempts made with clever Domain choices. If you build to take enough actions in a turn, even shapeshifters should be vulnerable to this trick.

Necromancy

Animate Dead minionmancy is obviously the big draw here. Clerics get Animate Dead sooner, and get Rebuke Undead (which allows you to change standing orders for undead you've released from your control pool, and doubles to power DMM shenanigans); however, Wizards get Command Undead, and the ability to create greater forms of undead.

However, another strong point for Necromancy is the Necrotic Cyst line of spells. Forget about Enchantment (and all those immune to its effects), Necromancy has you covered for your Domination needs. It also has some standouts like Bestow Curse and Magic Jar, that can be focal points for builds.

There's a lot of good options here, but I think that, if starting from 1st level, the Generic Spellcaster with Mother Cyst feat wins. You get Command Undead at 4th, Animate Dead at 6th, Necrotic Domination at 8th, still have access to creating greater undead, and gain things like True Resurrection (dip Tainted Sorcerer to ignore the material component, or just take a feat at Epic). If you're pulling a Yvonnel Baenre, you can also add things like Heal/Harm, and Cure spells, too. Starting at higher level, you have an undead army, and the rest of your build can almost be an afterthought, but I'd probably go Wizard, for the spell research to create better undead, and oldschool life-manipulation spells.

Evocation

Tainted Sorcerer optimization says opponents aren't going to be making those saving throws, and things like Wings of Cover are Evocation, but it's still rather anemic damage output compared to an optimized martial character.

Alternately, Miracle is Evocation, so Cleric or Generic Spellcaster could be good.

A lot of good options going this route; I think Generic Spellcaster / Tainted Sorcerer, to pick up all the good tricks while focusing on direct damage, is the route I'd go.

Conjuration

Between healing magic, Entangle, and Summons, would a Druid even notice that they've been limited if they chose Conjuration as their 1 school? :smallamused:

I'd probably go a different route, seeking Persisted Summons via DMM shenanigans, or Incantatrix / metamagic reducers.

Note: Cure spells, Solid Fog, Gate and Glitterdust are also Conjuration. So there's lots of options with just this 1 school besides summoning creatures to solve your problems.

Enchantment

Way too much is immune to your effects for this to be a solid choice. That said, would a Beguiler really lose much if they chose Enchantment as their 1 school? :smallamused:

At a low-op table, I might enjoy playing a half-ogre Enchanter, who walks around asking everyone in town if they want to be his friend.

Illusion

About the only reason I'd go this route is for Simulacrum (Invisibility is nice, but comes in item form). The school has too much that's too GM dependent. So I'd probably only pick Illusion if we were starting at high level, and I could create Simulacrae aplenty.

Abjuration

Reserves of Strength on a Dispel Magic based counterspell build, perhaps even a "technology" / Ravenloft Device based gish that can throw Antimagic Field and wade into melee. All in all, not really my style, and not terribly useful at my tables, but I can see the potential.

Divination

Scry and... get fried? The existing Divination spells might help the party to prepare, but there's not much a pure Diviner can do with the existing spells to prepare magic to actively utilize that knowledge. I might go this route in single author fiction, or under a GM who was really liberal with custom spell creation, but not as a PC in a party at your standard table.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Necromancy

Animate Dead minionmancy is obviously the big draw here. Clerics get Animate Dead sooner, and get Rebuke Undead (which allows you to change standing orders for undead you've released from your control pool, and doubles to power DMM shenanigans); however, Wizards get Command Undead, and the ability to create greater forms of undead.

However, another strong point for Necromancy is the Necrotic Cyst line of spells. Forget about Enchantment (and all those immune to its effects), Necromancy has you covered for your Domination needs. It also has some standouts like Bestow Curse and Magic Jar, that can be focal points for builds.

There's a lot of good options here, but I think that, if starting from 1st level, the Generic Spellcaster with Mother Cyst feat wins. You get Command Undead at 4th, Animate Dead at 6th, Necrotic Domination at 8th, still have access to creating greater undead, and gain things like True Resurrection (dip Tainted Sorcerer to ignore the material component, or just take a feat at Epic). If you're pulling a Yvonnel Baenre, you can also add things like Heal/Harm, and Cure spells, too. Starting at higher level, you have an undead army, and the rest of your build can almost be an afterthought, but I'd probably go Wizard, for the spell research to create better undead, and oldschool life-manipulation spells.

I'm not sure what the point of Generic Spellcaster is here.
A cleric can pick up one necromancy spell per level with the Divine Magician ACF, so you can grab all the good wizard necromancy spells on a cleric necromancer easily enough. And if you need more there's always the Spell domain, Miracle and UMD.

I also think you're seriously undervaluing the ability to rebuke/command undead. Remember that undead created by (Greater) Create Undead aren't automatically under your control, and wizards have no reliable long-term method of controlling them. And those spells are where most of the actually good undead that aren't just dumb beatsticks come from.
I certainly wouldn't trust Command Undead to control a bunch of intelligent high-level caster minions.

Compared to what you can create and control with those spells once you go template shopping Animate Dead is honestly pretty lame, even when used on dragons.
With Juju Zombies (UE), Bone/Corpse Creature (BoVD), Bonesinger (GW), Crypt Spawn and Spectral Mage (MoF) you can basically animate anything with class levels at full strength, and with rebuke then safely and reliably control them.
Throw in a Rod of Defiance and Lyre of the Restful Soul and you can command an entire party worth of undead, with the same levels, builds and abilities a party of PC's would have.

Playing a minionmancy-focused necromancer without rebuking is like playing a druid without natural spell. You could, but why would you?


I agree that Mother Cyst is fantastic though. Thankfully it works just as well on a cleric as it does on a wizard.

[Quertus]

I'm not sure what the point of Generic Spellcaster is here..

From Unearthed Arcana. Think “Sorcerer”, but can pick spells from all classes.


I'm not sure what the point of Generic Spellcaster is here.

Oh, right, the point was to combine the best spell options from each class. To be less subtle about it, I think that, if you’re limited to just a single school, the generic class is going to have a huge advantage here in general, as its limited Spell selection will cover “all the good stuff”.


A cleric can pick up one necromancy spell per level with the Divine Magician ACF, so you can grab all the good wizard necromancy spells on a cleric necromancer easily enough. And if you need more there's always the Spell domain, Miracle and UMD.

Is Miracle Necromancy? :smallconfused:

But, yes, agreed, there are lots of good build options here.


I also think you're seriously undervaluing the ability to rebuke/command undead.

I mean, I think it’s great, and listed two of the ways it’s incredibly useful. If I wasn’t AFB, I would have checked whether the generic caster could get it via feats.


Remember that undead created by (Greater) Create Undead aren't automatically under your control, and wizards have no reliable long-term method of controlling them. And those spells are where most of the actually good undead that aren't just dumb beatsticks come from.
I certainly wouldn't trust Command Undead to control a bunch of intelligent high-level caster minions.

Ok, dumb question: although I mostly (strongly) agree, can you spell out why you consider Rebuke superior to Command Undead?

I, personally, tend towards s’mores of mostly mindless undead, where Command Undead and standing orders can usually keep things under control.


Compared to what you can create and control with those spells once you go template shopping Animate Dead is honestly pretty lame, even when used on dragons.
With Juju Zombies (UE), Bone/Corpse Creature (BoVD), Bonesinger (GW), Crypt Spawn and Spectral Mage (MoF) you can basically animate anything with class levels at full strength, and with rebuke then safely and reliably control them.
Throw in a Rod of Defiance and Lyre of the Restful Soul and you can command an entire party worth of undead, with the same levels, builds and abilities a party of PC's would have.

Yeah, with enough optimization, Rebuke is party level strong. Of course, that Corpse party probably doesn’t have PC gear, and you’re spending $$$ to keep them under control (and making yourself obvious making a racket, and have to remain within so many feet of these corpses, and…). One enemy Wall Spell (or turning a corner in a dungeon) to block line of effect, and that’s a party of enemies you’ve brought with you.

It’s good, but it’s got drawbacks against PC level opponents, and can make the simple logistics of traveling anywhere but a flat plane into a nightmare.


Playing a minionmancy-focused necromancer without rebuking is like playing a druid without natural spell. You could, but why would you?

You’d make Undead minions without Rebuke if you’re playing a class that doesn’t get it? Sure, it’s playing with one hand behind your back in that regard, no disagreement from me, it’s just a matter of what the other classes offer in addition to minions, and what you enjoy. I happen to enjoy huge armies of the undead (Yes, such an army is also rather obvious, like the 24/7 marching band), whereas I hate playing all the $$$ for onyx. So an arcane caster, for Tainted Sorcerer, for free components, unless we’re starting at Epic level for Eschew/Ignore materials, or 3.pf for Blood Components, or some other trick to enable suitably affordable armies of mindless undead.


I agree that Mother Cyst is fantastic though. Thankfully it works just as well on a cleric as it does on a wizard.

Sure. Or an Ur-Priest. I was just stating what build I thought I’d be most likely to play in this scenario. Your Cleric build would be stronger in several ways, but mine would probably be more fun for me.

Still, I did say that the generic caster probably wins, which sounds like more than just “wins out for which I’d choose”, so let’s look at those advantages again.

It gets to pick and choose the best / earliest access to the various Necromancy spells, so it’s up there with your ACF (What does the ACF give up, btw?). Both can take Mother Cyst. AFB, but maybe it can get Rebuke; if not, that’s an advantage for Cleric. In exchange for HP and Fort save and BAB, the Generic Spellcaster gets to choose its class skills (UMD, Lucid Dreaming, Iaijutsu Focus, whatever), can cast more spells per day (which means it can build a larger army of undead faster), and has access to free components via Tainted Sorcerer (as well as other IMO superior Prestige Class options). It’s feat starved, but I don’t think it would compare poorly to the Cleric unless the GM allowed the levels of edition Chronomancy of a certain Drow Matron Mother. Or if the GM was me, and the characters started at 1st level, where your Cleric would be much more likely to survive… at least until they tried the corpse party trick against intelligent foes.

Both are really good, and I think I’d find either fun, but maybe I’m just ignorant of good Cleric Prestige classes, but I think that the customization of the generic class, from choice of class skills to good Prestige Classes, makes it better suited to filling whatever roles the party composition / the player’s desires require of it beyond just “I brought them” minionmancy.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Ok, dumb question: although I mostly (strongly) agree, can you spell out why you consider Rebuke superior to Command Undead?

I, personally, tend towards s’mores of mostly mindless undead, where Command Undead and standing orders can usually keep things under control.
Because Animate Dead makes more HD of mindless undead beatsticks than you ever need in practice. For peanuts.
No need to mess with a spell that needs to be recast and can get dispelled for those.

Create Undead on the other hand lets you make Juju Zombies at CL 10, and they keep pretty much everything. And they're still dirt cheap for what you get.
Intelligence, class levels, extraordinary and supernatural abilities, skill ranks, feats and so on. And to permanently control them you need rebuking.

Also rebuke is both permanent once used and supernatural, so it can't be dispelled except by an evil cleric with better turning than yours.
Which is... supremely unlikely, since you have all the reasons to optimize the hell out of it.

Edit: i made a rather detailed post on how to optimize rebuking here. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=25485822&postcount=9)


Yeah, with enough optimization, Rebuke is party level strong. Of course, that Corpse party probably doesn’t have PC gear, and you’re spending $$$ to keep them under control (and making yourself obvious making a racket, and have to remain within so many feet of these corpses, and…). One enemy Wall Spell (or turning a corner in a dungeon) to block line of effect, and that’s a party of enemies you’ve brought with you.

It’s good, but it’s got drawbacks against PC level opponents, and can make the simple logistics of traveling anywhere but a flat plane into a nightmare.
I'm not sure where you're getting most of that from.
Rebuking doesn't cost money (unless you count gear to boost it, but that's usually rather cheap).
It's a supernatural ability that doesn't make any sound.
It's a standard action, not an aura. Once commanded you can go as far away from your minions as you like (since you can command them telepathically).
Line of effect doesn't matter once they're commanded, it's basically a supernatural Dominate Undead spell.
Even if it does get suppressed by an AMF, as soon as they leave it it's back again.



It gets to pick and choose the best / earliest access to the various Necromancy spells, so it’s up there with your ACF (What does the ACF give up, btw?). Both can take Mother Cyst. AFB, but maybe it can get Rebuke; if not, that’s an advantage for Cleric. In exchange for HP and Fort save and BAB, the Generic Spellcaster gets to choose its class skills (UMD, Lucid Dreaming, Iaijutsu Focus, whatever), can cast more spells per day (which means it can build a larger army of undead faster), and has access to free components via Tainted Sorcerer (as well as other IMO superior Prestige Class options). It’s feat starved, but I don’t think it would compare poorly to the Cleric unless the GM allowed the levels of edition Chronomancy of a certain Drow Matron Mother. Or if the GM was me, and the characters started at 1st level, where your Cleric would be much more likely to survive… at least until they tried the corpse party trick against intelligent foes.

Both are really good, and I think I’d find either fun, but maybe I’m just ignorant of good Cleric Prestige classes, but I think that the customization of the generic class, from choice of class skills to good Prestige Classes, makes it better suited to filling whatever roles the party composition / the player’s desires require of it beyond just “I brought them” minionmancy.
Divine Magician gives up one of your two starting domains and gives you one divination, necromancy or abjuration spell from the wizard list per level (Complete Champion iirc).

As for not using components Dweomerkeeper's supernatural spell has you covered, but it'd require the Magic domain and doesn't work on all spells. A lot of the better cleric prc's need a domain.
Though component cost isn't exactly a massive issue. 50gp/HD is nothing, so making huge sacrifices to eliminate that cost is a waste of build resources.
And there's very few class skills (if any) you can't get between domains and feats. And domains are really the major draw for sticking with cleric imo.

[Quertus]

I'm not sure where you're getting most of that from.
Rebuking doesn't cost money (unless you count gear to boost it, but that's usually rather cheap).
It's a supernatural ability that doesn't make any sound.
It's a standard action, not an aura. Once commanded you can go as far away from your minions as you like (since you can command them telepathically).
Line of effect doesn't matter once they're commanded, it's basically a supernatural Dominate Undead spell.
Even if it does get suppressed by an AMF, as soon as they leave it it's back again.


Throw in a Rod of Defiance and Lyre of the Restful Soul and you can command an entire party worth of undead, with the same levels, builds and abilities a party of PC's would have.

It's the Lyre (and, to a lesser extent, the Rod) I'm concerned about using to maintain control of undead. I've seen it run both ways, but last time the Playground weighed in on how such things work in a thread I was in, the consensus was that, if/when the effect ends, how much of your control pool the undead take up changes, meaning that you have to keep the Lyre constantly playing, and that effects from it only work while the undead are within range and have Line of Effect to be in the AoE. Granted, if random people talking about it online can be trusted (AFB), the effects of the Lyre at least last 10 rounds, so it's not the case that you instantaneously have your control pool size changed when you walk around a corner, but it still means that you need to micromanage time and distance and line of effect to keep these minions at controllable levels, and are a 24/7 "walking band" (or, at least, someone left the radio / minstrel running 24/7), and you're still vulnerable to things like the Bagpipes (I misremembered, and thought they were on your side, thus my "band" reference), or other effects which boost the undead, plus silence, and antimagic, and small rooms, and someone taking out the minstrel. Which means the undead party plan is just asking for trouble in more ways than 1, in addition to also being much less interesting to me personally than, say, improving a nation's economy with a global scale free mindless workforce.

So, if I want a population 1 million nation to have one undead per household... even assuming large households averaging 5 people each, that's... math... still 10 million GP just for 1 HD human skeletons? Even starting with only a single small city, even at only 1 1-HD undead laborer per 5 citizens, will still run you... at least 50k gp, 250k GP at 1 undead laborer per person, 1.25 million GP for 5 undead laborers per living citizen. There's a reason why mitigating the price is important to me, even before we talk about how many True Resurrections the party is likely to need over the course of a year of play (hint: it's probably more than 1). IIRC, the Dwoemerkeeper has some issues with both Animate Dead and True Resurrection - maybe limited uses per day and max spell level? I don't know (still AFB), I just remember Dwoemerkeeper not being a good answer for my purposes.

[sleepyphoenixx]

It's the Lyre (and, to a lesser extent, the Rod) I'm concerned about using to maintain control of undead. I've seen it run both ways, but last time the Playground weighed in on how such things work in a thread I was in, the consensus was that, if/when the effect ends, how much of your control pool the undead take up changes, meaning that you have to keep the Lyre constantly playing, and that effects from it only work while the undead are within range and have Line of Effect to be in the AoE. Granted, if random people talking about it online can be trusted (AFB), the effects of the Lyre at least last 10 rounds, so it's not the case that you instantaneously have your control pool size changed when you walk around a corner, but it still means that you need to micromanage time and distance and line of effect to keep these minions at controllable levels, and are a 24/7 "walking band" (or, at least, someone left the radio / minstrel running 24/7), and you're still vulnerable to things like the Bagpipes (I misremembered, and thought they were on your side, thus my "band" reference), or other effects which boost the undead, plus silence, and antimagic, and small rooms, and someone taking out the minstrel. Which means the undead party plan is just asking for trouble in more ways than 1, in addition to also being much less interesting to me personally than, say, improving a nation's economy with a global scale free mindless workforce.
Except that's not how permanent effects in 3.5 work.
The effect is applied with the stats you have when you make the roll, and it doesn't change afterward just because your stats change unless an ability explicitly says otherwise.

If you cast a buff with a CL boost the CL doesn't suddenly go lower just because the boost wore off.
If your cleric casts a party buff the buff doesn't wear off whenever you lose LoE (unless it's an emanation, which TU is not).
If a cleric turns/rebukes undead they don't suddenly become unturned/unrebuked because his turning booster wore off.

There is absolutely no RAW basis for treating commanding differently. Your control pool size only gets checked when you make a rebuking roll.
You don't need to keep LoE afterwards and you don't need to keep playing the lyre 24/7, you play it when you're rebuking and put it back into your bag afterwards.


So, if I want a population 1 million nation to have one undead per household... even assuming large households averaging 5 people each, that's... math... still 10 million GP just for 1 HD human skeletons? Even starting with only a single small city, even at only 1 1-HD undead laborer per 5 citizens, will still run you... at least 50k gp, 250k GP at 1 undead laborer per person, 1.25 million GP for 5 undead laborers per living citizen. There's a reason why mitigating the price is important to me, even before we talk about how many True Resurrections the party is likely to need over the course of a year of play (hint: it's probably more than 1). IIRC, the Dwoemerkeeper has some issues with both Animate Dead and True Resurrection - maybe limited uses per day and max spell level? I don't know (still AFB), I just remember Dwoemerkeeper not being a good answer for my purposes.

If you want to supply an entire nation with undead make them pay for it? Or just let the undead make profession checks to pay for their own creation cost (mining for example) before you hand them over.

As for the limits of Dweomerkeeper it's casting time. Supernatural Spell only works on spells with a casting time of a standard action or less.

[Asmotherion]

Easy, Conjuration for it's versatility.

[Jay R]

I want to talk to the DM and the other players before I make my choice. I don't want everybody to bring doughnuts and nobody to bring drinks to the D&D game, and for the same reason, I don't want an entire party with only one school of magic.

If the world is overflowing with undead, then enchantment and illusion are too vulnerable.

My first choice in general is conjuration. If another player wants that, then transmutation. After that, then illusion, enchantment, or evocation, depending on what I know about how the DM rules on illusion and enchantment spells. [Those can be devastating with some DMs, and badly nerfed with others.]

I'd like to know what world background led to this requirement of a single school of magic. The history that led up to it might give me some great hook for a character background. That could be far more important than mere tactical considerations.

Really -- you haven't given me anything to base a character off of yet.

[Rynjin]

Conjuration is the boring but practical option, but my heart truly belongs to Transmutation. Has utility, buffing, debuffing, and even a direct damage spell in Disintegrate. Perfection.

[Quertus]

I want to talk to the DM and the other players before I make my choice. I don't want everybody to bring doughnuts and nobody to bring drinks to the D&D game, and for the same reason, I don't want an entire party with only one school of magic.

If the world is overflowing with undead, then enchantment and illusion are too vulnerable.

My first choice in general is conjuration. If another player wants that, then transmutation. After that, then illusion, enchantment, or evocation, depending on what I know about how the DM rules on illusion and enchantment spells. [Those can be devastating with some DMs, and badly nerfed with others.]

I'd like to know what world background led to this requirement of a single school of magic. The history that led up to it might give me some great hook for a character background. That could be far more important than mere tactical considerations.

Really -- you haven't given me anything to base a character off of yet.

Touché. You’re right, in that what many people (myself included) would actually run at an actual table would, indeed, be dependent upon numerous factors, such as table considerations, or what ideas for characters they had (for which the mechanics of the world certainly could act as seeds), and that those factors are generally more important than just smaller tactical considerations or personal preference.

OTOH, the important part of Bruce Payne’s backstory, the factors that determine the largest/central portions of his path and personality, and ultimately led to him becoming Ratman, costumed vigilante who shoots criminals to death, was having his parents shot and killed by a mugger before his eyes, and a terrifying experience falling into a cave of winged rats, much more so than his reality dictating that people can only learn a single school of martial arts. Not that it doesn’t matter, but only getting to choose a single martial art at best reinforces his choice of gun-fu (or, alternately, invalidates the comfort of him also mastering the ancient “costume with a tail” fighting style - it wouldn’t invalidate him wanting to, any more than conventual reality’s lack of collocation would invalidate my desire to simultaneously live in, say, Hawaii and Rome, it merely informs what I can physically do with that desire). Such mechanics are secondary at best to the personality of the character, for most characters.

Or, at least, that’s the way I make character personalities.

And besides, I can still ask questions like, “if I happen to come up with a character concept for each school, or one that that could fit any school, and like the personalities all equally / they all fit with the party equally / they all sound like they’d make equally good stories / etc, and had to choose solely on the basis of which school’s mechanics I thought I would enjoy, which would I take, and why?”, and be right back to answering the question without such considerations.

So, sure, “which school do they use” isn’t the most important factor in choice of character in an RPG, or the most important factor in determining how much I’d enjoy playing them, I fully and strongly agree. And I also strongly agree that the underlying mechanics could be hugely influential if the denizens of the world are aware of them, and if they notice anything unusual about them (if, say, they’re part of a multiverse, where only their world operates this way, as opposed to only knowing their own reality, and being more “humans have 2 eyes, cows give milk, spiders spin webs, wood floats, things fall down, and casters can only cast from a single school - why does one of these seem odd to you, and make you ask ‘why’?”). I just suspect you’d get more mileage out of not binding “creating personalities” and “mechanical details” (especially if uncovering those details might be part of the campaign), or “tactical considerations” to “preferences” so tightly.

Whereas the reverse? Instead off asking how the world mechanically got there, and instead asking, “how has society evolved differently from what I’m familiar with based on humans having 2 eyes / casters only getting to cast from a single school?”? Especially when coupled with a qualifier like, “given that I’m familiar with realities with societies created by 3-Sphere-using 1-eyed purple people eaters”? If you discover that, in this world, Necromancy is Abnegation, Divination is Erudite, Transmutation is Slytherin, etc? Or that Knowledge of one’s school is a huge secret, such that “fake” spells to let one “pretend” a different school (conjured Fireballs, Animate Objects targeting corpses, etc) are a major part of the world? Or they aren’t, but your GM is down with you doing so? Now you’ve got the meaty details you need to spark ideas, and to build a character that matches the world building, and that you can roleplay in a way that makes them feel like they come from the GM’s world, instead of a world of one-eyed purple people eaters. If, you know, you can find a GM who has the skills and took the world building seriously enough to have the single-school casting have logical, meaningful consequences in the creation of the world’s societies, and had the skills and patience to fully explain such in a useful way.

Or, at least, that’s the way I look at both world building and crafting character personalities.

To put the main theme another way, even if “color” may not be the most important factor in choosing a car or house, one can still have a preference.

On an unrelated note, personally, I love it when everyone brings donuts. Literal or metaphorical ones. :smallbiggrin::smallamused:

[Darg]

I think people are quick to build characters according to the style of DM and setting because there are many times builds and characters that can simply be worthless. If a player wanted to play an enchanter in an undead heavy campaign there are a plethora of ways to make it a valuable addition to the party. That said, if your DM just drops you into a never ending crypt with nothing but undead then the efficacy of being an enchanter dropped significantly.