Need help roleplaying a CN Necromancer in a party with a LG undead hating Paladin

[Jaredino]

I am in a group with a Paladin of Kelemvor, Kelemvor Lyonsbane being a god of the dead, and who HATES the undead. Since the paladins main purpose is to help souls pass on to the other side, trapping them in a corpse and forcing them to fight is like the ultimate heresy. As of now my character is keeping the necromancy secret from the other members of the party (in character of course, out of character EVERYONE knows my guy is learning necromancy spells) and I have a few ideas on how to use necromancy without getting in a fight with the paladin. I was thinking of just having some of my zombies follow the party, and have them appear from behind the party for reinforcements whenever we are in a bind. The main problem with that is that zombies have garbage dex, so the party would detect them without much trouble, and probably kill them. Does anybody have any tips on how I could play a necromancer so that either the paladin doesn't know, or if he does I can still do necromancy without having to fight him?

[Lord Raziere]

Jaredino, the solution to this problem is:

Step One: talk it over with the paladin's player
Step Two: adjust your character to fit the party if that player is not ok with this.

and do not ever try to solve this ICly. that ALWAYS ends badly, for everyone involved.

[goto124]

Why are you trying to do this?

The paladin's player isn't going to be terribly happy, for one thing.

The first step, is to talk to that player.

Chances are, you'll have to play something that isn't a necromancer... apologies, but your chances are slim.

[Jaredino]

Why are you trying to do this?

The paladin's player isn't going to be terribly happy, for one thing.

The first step, is to talk to that player.

Chances are, you'll have to play something that isn't a necromancer... apologies, but your chances are slim.

The fact is that I actually started this character from level 1, and had intended to play a necromancer from the very beginning, since we didn't have a paladin at the time. We had a hard encounter, and most of the other pc's were wiped out, except for mine and one other guys. That led to the creation of the paladin, and I really don't want to try and tell him to not play a character, but at the same time my wizard has survived 5 levels of a merciless DM who doesn't fudge dice rolls, and I feel I should get to continue playing my wizard for as long as he survives. I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

[Lord Raziere]

I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

There are no solutions in game.

this is not a roleplaying problem, this is a player communication problem. attempting to solve this in game will just end with the paladin trying to investigate where all the undead are coming from, this will eventually lead to him finding out about your character making undead then trying to kill him. or cause something similarly bad to happen, and either the paladins or your fun will be ruined. talk it over with him now to come up with a compromise or solution, or deal with the inevitable mess that will result.

[goto124]

I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

You need to talk to the paladin's player to figure out an in game solution he/she will be happy with. Otherwise a hideous mess ensues.

Wait! Why is the guy playing an undead hater if he knows there's a necromancer in the party? Talk to him about that! Especially when the rest of the party has been rather okay with the necromancer...

[Dexam]

Paladin of Kelemvor, which means a Forgotten Realms campaign, yes?

This might be your solution.

Since the paladins main purpose is to help souls pass on to the other side, trapping them in a corpse and forcing them to fight is like the ultimate heresy.

If I recall correctly, and it may have changed since then, under 3rd Edition rules and earlier skeletons, zombies, and other mindless undead in the Forgotten Realms setting are neutral, as they are animated bodies i.e. the equivalent of animated objects, where the "object" is a body; there are no souls trapped in the corpses.

Technically a necromancer is still desecrating a body by animating it (a non-Good act), but talk it over with the Paladin's player and see if you can come to an agreement that provided your character sticks to mindless undead only, they might have some leeway in-character.

[Keltest]

Paladin of Kelemvor, which means a Forgotten Realms campaign, yes?

This might be your solution.


If I recall correctly, and it may have changed since then, under 3rd Edition rules and earlier skeletons, zombies, and other mindless undead in the Forgotten Realms setting are neutral, as they are animated bodies i.e. the equivalent of animated objects, where the "object" is a body; there are no souls trapped in the corpses.

Technically a necromancer is still desecrating a body by animating it (a non-Good act), but talk it over with the Paladin's player and see if you can come to an agreement that provided your character sticks to mindless undead only, they might have some leeway in-character.

Unfortunately, its part of Kelemvor's creed that Undead are very Bad and Must be destroyed on sight no matter their size, shape, appearance, or alignment. The only exceptions would be the voluntary forms of undead like elven baelnorns or guardian spirits, and the chances of animating those every time are rather slim.

So yes, I would ask the paladin player why he thought it was a good idea to play an undead-hater in a party that already had a necromancer in it. There is a very good chance that if/when it comes down to it, you will get the rest of the party on your side and he will be the one to change character.

[goto124]

At the very least? Change gods to one that doesn't hate undead.

[Spartakus]

Unfortunately, its part of Kelemvor's creed that Undead are very Bad and Must be destroyed on sight no matter their size, shape, appearance, or alignment. The only exceptions would be the voluntary forms of undead like elven baelnorns or guardian spirits, and the chances of animating those every time are rather slim.

So yes, I would ask the paladin player why he thought it was a good idea to play an undead-hater in a party that already had a necromancer in it. There is a very good chance that if/when it comes down to it, you will get the rest of the party on your side and he will be the one to change character.

agreed. Playing a paladin in a party with a zombie animating necromancer migth work but a follower of Kelemvor propably not.

If you rely solely on necromancy-spells that don't create undead and are not evil it could, but wheres the point in playing a necromancer without having undead minions?

If he retcons his paladin to another god it is still difficult but can be made. First option is the lawful stupid Paladin and your creations provide a distraction for him ("Look there, undead! Destroy them while we ask this captured enemy some questions!") but this doesn't sound like a fun char for the PAL-player.


I'm intending to play a LN necromancer in a party with a good cleric soon and I'm picturing him to be an expy of NRA-lobbyists ("Undeads aren't unholy, the people who command them to do evil things are! We don't need fewer undead, we need more to provide protection of the innocent!"). But depending on which side of the Atlantic you live on this might offend other players

[Sacrieur]

Time to start maximizing that bluff.

"These aren't dead guys... They're just uh... Sick..."

Oh or you can start casting illusion on all of your guys to make them seem real. Maybe you can just conveniently turn invisible while the Paladin isn't looking so he doesn't know you're the one raising all these dead guys. You're a wizard, this paladin guy aint got nutin' on you.

There are no solutions in game.

this is not a roleplaying problem, this is a player communication problem. attempting to solve this in game will just end with the paladin trying to investigate where all the undead are coming from, this will eventually lead to him finding out about your character making undead then trying to kill him. or cause something similarly bad to happen, and either the paladins or your fun will be ruined. talk it over with him now to come up with a compromise or solution, or deal with the inevitable mess that will result.

LOL NO.

He should talk to the DM about how to keep his rolls and such a secret from the player playing the paladin, so there's a minimized chance of metagaming going on. That's what I'd be worrying about, the paladin being metagamed into finding these undead. I highly doubt some idiot paladin is going to be able to find out where all these undead are coming from if the Wizard plays his cards right. And since he is a wizard, he has so many tools at his disposal for this it's not even funny.

Should I even start with the huge list of magical items that would leave the party's paladin confused and bewildered?

---

Oh and if it comes down to it, he's LG, you're CN. You can kill him, but he can't kill you without falling. There, now you can raise him as a leader of your undead army.

[AzraelX]

I think changing the appearance of the undead would be your best bet. You mentioned that the only real issue is that the party will be able to spot them easily, which is what results in their death. It'd therefore make the most sense to just solve the "party spotting the undead" problem. Making them look like something else, or making them invisible, are both solid options.

Time to start maximizing that bluff.

"These aren't dead guys... They're just uh... Sick..."

Oh or you can start casting illusion on all of your guys to make them seem real. Maybe you can just conveniently turn invisible while the Paladin isn't looking so he doesn't know you're the one raising all these dead guys. You're a wizard, this paladin guy aint got nutin' on you.

The first on-topic reply.

Seriously, how many times does the OP have to explicitly state that OOC solutions are neither helpful nor wanted before people stop using his thread as their personal garbage dump? If you can't think of any solutions to his problem (and he's stated multiple times in multiple posts that he just wants in-game suggestions), that's cool; there's plenty of problems in the world I'm not creative or knowledgeable enough to solve within their required parameters.

The difference is that you need to be able to recognize that fact, and not try to force your own playstyle and group dynamics onto other people who've explicitly asked you to stop. Please have some respect for the creator of the thread.

[goto124]

Why are OOC solutions not helpful? All I got:

I really don't want to try and tell him to not play a character, but at the same time my wizard has survived 5 levels of a merciless DM who doesn't fudge dice rolls, and I feel I should get to continue playing my wizard for as long as he survives. I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

For the sake of the discussion, we shall assume that OP wants help coming up with IC ideas, so that he can bring them up with the Paladin's player OOCly and work together to settle on an agreement from there. In this case, there could be dishonesty between the paladin and the necromancer, but there really shouldn't be dishonesty between the PLAYERS. Dishonesty tends to get busted after a while, too, and it makes players mad when they eventually find out.

[Sith_Happens]

Seriously, how many times does the OP have to explicitly state that OOC solutions are neither helpful nor wanted before people stop using his thread as their personal garbage dump?

Once. Which is once more than it's been so far.

[Sacrieur]

I think changing the appearance of the undead would be your best bet. You mentioned that the only real issue is that the party will be able to spot them easily, which is what results in their death. It'd therefore make the most sense to just solve the "party spotting the undead" problem. Making them look like something else, or making them invisible, are both solid options.

Making them invisible is A+ doublegood.

I'd avoid anything that gives the paladin a Will save to disbelieve since you know Paladins have outrageous saves thanks to Divine Grace.

For the sake of the discussion, we shall assume that OP wants help coming up with IC ideas, so that he can bring them up with the Paladin's player OOCly and work together to settle on an agreement from there. In this case, there could be dishonesty between the paladin and the necromancer, but there really shouldn't be dishonesty between the PLAYERS. Dishonesty tends to get busted after a while, too, and it makes players mad when they eventually find out.

That's the DMs problem. If a player wants to keep something a secret he has every right to do so. I could go on about how a DM should handle this situation, but let's stay on topic.

[Anonymouswizard]

I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

Okay, some things first, I am going to assume you have tried them:
1) When the Paladin was created, had you told the other players, including Paladinperson, that you were planning on going necromancer?
1a) Did you explicitly say that you were planning on being a 'skeleton and zombie' necromancer? If so, you don't need to do anything, you are in the right, you had the character first, you were honest.
1b) did you bring this up as soon as you knew the paladin served an undead-hating god? If so, why has this not been solved out of game, by say the paladin moving to another deity.
2) Talk to the GM and player about it, see if they are willing to ignore that part of the lore.

Alright, possible in-game ways to make it work:
1) You do not see zombies as something that should be permanent, but rather a disposable tool. A zombie is something that you animate and use for a day or two, before respectfully unanimating it and dispose of the corpse as the original owner would have wished.
2) You do not make zombies without express permission from the ex-person. They've said they have no problem with it, as long as zombies aren't strictly illegal where you are you can called the law down on the paladin if he objects.
3) Illusions, bluff, or similar.
4) Play an anti-undead necromancer or debuffer necromancer. As you want zombies/skeletons this is a last resort.
5) Get the rest of the party on your side. If all bar the paladin are fine with you making zombies then the Paladin has no support.

[goto124]

Backing up Wizard above me, expecially points 1, 1a, 1b, and 2.

Why couldn't it be handled OOCly? What exactly happened in that state? OP asked for IC solutions, which tend to fall apart when the OOC climate is unknown.

OP said "I really don't want to try and tell him to not play a character". Why? Is the player a stubborn and bad player? Did your attempts to convince the DM to kick him out fail? Is walking out a possible solution for you?

It's best if the paladin's player knows what you're doing and goes along with it, then the IC methods of 'necromancer hiding from the paladin' don't have to cover nearly as many bases. If you're hiding things from the paladin's PLAYER as well, then there's such a huge list of things to stuff under the carpet that it probably won't take long to get busted- if anything, you're acting rather suspicious around him, passing notes with the DM, etc.

Again, we're asking for the OOC situation so that we can adjust the IC solution to fit.

[AzraelX]

Does anybody have any tips on how I could play a necromancer so that either the paladin doesn't know, or if he does I can still do necromancy without having to fight him?

I am looking for solutions IN GAME

how many times does the OP have to explicitly state that OOC solutions are neither helpful nor wanted

Once. Which is once more than it's been so far.

Okay then.

[Anonymouswizard]

He has stated he prefers in game solutions, not that he doesn't want OOC ones. I only gave OOC stuff to highlight that to me it sounds like the paladin should spend 10 minutes either agreeing to changing his concept slightly to play nicer. What it might be is that the paladin player doesn't want to stop the zombies, but thinks an anti-undead paladin in the party will lead to decent roleplay.

[AzraelX]

Making them invisible is A+ doublegood.

I'd avoid anything that gives the paladin a Will save to disbelieve since you know Paladins have outrageous saves thanks to Divine Grace.

Good point!

Why couldn't it be handled OOCly? What exactly happened in that state?

Not really anyone's business. He didn't ask for your opinion as a group therapist, he *explicitly* asked for in-game solutions.

OP asked for IC solutions, which tend to fall apart when the OOC climate is unknown.

No, they don't. You give him in-game solutions, and he'll use his own knowledge of the "OOC climate" to decide which of those suggestions he'll proceed with in-game, if any. He asked for methods within the game rules which would allow his necromancer's undead to not be engaged by a paladin, not for emergency forum assistance in preventing his group from falling apart.

Nothing he's said would suggest the latter situation is remotely applicable, nor is it acceptable to demand details to try to verify whether or not that's the case, because it is unrelated to the question he asked. Pretend the paladin is an NPC, maybe that will make the question easier for you to focus on.

OP said "I really don't want to try and tell him to not play a character". Why? Is the player a stubborn and bad player? Did your attempts to convince the DM to kick him out fail? Is walking out a possible solution for you?

I'm 1000% sure that a guy who said "I want IN-GAME solutions" has no desire or intention of trying to connivingly manipulate or badger the DM into kicking out people whose characters have competing interests with his own in-game.

Maybe the reason he's endeavored to make it crystal clear that he wants people to keep their advice strictly in-game only is because he doesn't particularly want to share his life details with the internet at large, and really doesn't care about whatever unsolicited personal advice regarding his real-life relationships they might have, thus he has no interest in listening to any useless pseudo-psychiatric advice and would appreciate it if it would stop polluting his thread.

I'm sure he'd also appreciate it if you might stop prioritizing your own desire to turn this into a real-life player conflict over his own stated desire not to hear it, at least in his own thread, which is specifically asking about playing a game, not for social insights from random forum-goers who aren't especially qualified to give that advice, and certainly not more qualified than he is himself.

If you can't answer simple in-game rules/ideas questions without knowing the relationships between all the players, well, that's on you. It doesn't change the fact it's totally unreasonable and inappropriate to continue asking for that information after he clarified that's not the kind of "help" he wants.

2) You do not make zombies with express permission from the ex-person.

I hope this is supposed to say "without"

He has stated he prefers in game solutions, not that he doesn't want OOC ones.

This isn't a skewed RAW reading where someone can argue that they become immune to lava by casting prestidigitation on themselves. When someone says in all caps that they want "IN-GAME" solutions, that means knock it off with the OOC. At this point no one has any excuse to pretend they didn't understand what he wants.

That said, you provided five excellent in-game solutions in your post. You aren't included in "people who are willfully ignoring the OP's multiple requests to provide in-game solutions while demanding details about his personal life", which is inappropriate at best.

What it might be is that the paladin player doesn't want to stop the zombies, but thinks an anti-undead paladin in the party will lead to decent roleplay.

Probably, but due to RP reasons, the paladin will need to kill the undead if they're encountered. Either way, the in-game solutions for allowing his undead and the paladin to coexist will be useful to him. Thanks for your contributions!

[AxeAlex]

You want in-characters solutions? Come clean with the paladin, and reach a compromise. You guys simply have to be humble in your interpretation of your characters and there should be no problem.

"Look my friend, I have something horrible to tell you, I hope you will be able to forgive me for hiding it to you for so long...."

"...But you see, the undead saved my life once, and I understand that I'm doing something wrong, but that is one of my best tools as a wizard to help innocent, still living people..."

"...And when we have saved the world, I will follow you, let you take me in, and I will allow you to judge me in front of Kelemvor. When this moment comes, I hope my actions can win Kelemvor's forgiveness"

Good thing is, your character don't even have to be sincere, but can still reach a compromise with the Paladin.

You admits your are doing something wrong and will turn yourself in someday (After the campaign), but the Paladin admits your magic saved his life in the past and he owes you mercy (Honor cuts both ways). He will tolerate your zombies (May even have a conflict with other followers of Kelemvor over it, bonus plot points!), first for the sake of his friend, and also for the greater good.

You guys are both here to have fun, compromise then go on. There is no need for the situation to be complicated.

[AzraelX]

You want in-characters solutions? Come clean with the paladin, and reach a compromise. You guys simply have to be humble in your interpretation of your characters and there should be no problem.

"Look my friend, I have something horrible to tell you, I hope you will be able to forgive me for hiding it to you for so long...."

"...But you see, the undead saved my life once, and I understand that I'm doing something wrong, but that is one of my best tools as a wizard to help innocent, still living people..."

"...And when we have saved the world, I will follow you, let you take me in, and I will allow you to judge me in front of Kelemvor. When this moment comes, I hope my actions can win Kelemvor's forgiveness"

That's a great RP solution. I'd break the ice slowly to figure out just how zealous the paladin is regarding undead though, because once your necromancer puts that information out there, he can't take it back. Maybe broach the subject as a hypothetical to see what kind of reaction can be expected.

If worse comes to worst and your necromancer tells the paladin outright like this, and the paladin freaks out, pretend you were just kidding or that you'll never do it again. Then you can implement the other strategies in this thread, since they mostly involve ways to prevent the paladin from getting a chance to kill the undead in the first place

[Sith_Happens]

Not really anyone's business. He didn't ask for your opinion as a group therapist, he *explicitly* asked for in-game solutions.

Context, it's important. Then again you probably know that already, seeing as you very carefully excised it from your own quotes:

I am looking for solutions IN GAME, to clarify, not "just don't play a necromancer".

So far no one has told the OP to not play a necromancer. They've said either that the Paladin of Kelemvor shouldn't be playing a Paladin of Kelemvor (because the necromancer was there first), or that any attempt at in in-game solution is doomed to horrible failure without first knowing out-of-game what the Paladin player's angle is. And the second of those things is just plain true; for all we know the other player is bringing this Paladin into the game specifically with the intention of raining Smite Evils all over the OP's necromancy parade and won't take no for an answer unless explicitly called out on his bull**** (and maybe not even then).

Never mind that 90% of people who come to this forum "explicitly asking for in-game solutions" to intraparty problems do such out of either naïveté or spite, therefore the usual platitudes are the assumed right answer until proven otherwise.

[AzraelX]

Context, it's important.

Yeah, it is. "I want IN-GAME solutions, to clarify" doesn't have any other meanings; adding "not [specific example he was replying to]" after it doesn't change that meaning. Giving an applicable example of something unwanted that was already said makes the meaning more explicit. That's how examples work.

I'm not sure how purposely skewed you had to make your understanding of English to conclude that giving an example of something invalidates the thing it's giving an example of.

So far no one has told the OP to not play a necromancer.

Cool. They actually did do that before his post. It's nice of them to not continue doing that, since it was an explicit example of what he doesn't want in this thread.

Add to that the fact it was immediately preceded by "I want IN-GAME solutions, to clarify", and it's not real hard to puzzle out what solutions he does want in his thread. Context, it's important.

any attempt at in in-game solution is doomed to horrible failure without first knowing out-of-game what the Paladin player's angle is.

No, it isn't. That's just plain false. It's cute that you think you can advise him about his group dynamics better than he can advise himself, and that you think he needs to detail his real life so you can give him these great insights you have which you're sure are both super important and will be really enlightening to him.

Nah. Plenty of suggestions were given already, which actually answered his question. He'll use his own knowledge of the group and the paladin to decide what to use. He's clearly a big boy, and it's clear he can handle the player dynamics at his table better than you can.

How can you tell? Because he clarified in all caps that he wants "IN-GAME solutions". Context, it's important.

for all we know the other player is bringing this Paladin into the game specifically with the intention of raining Smite Evils all over the OP's necromancy parade and won't take no for an answer unless explicitly called out on his bull****

Sure. Too bad it's not your table, or your business. He isn't asking you for your expert advice on sociological topics. I'm sure you're one button press away from posting a scan of your PhD along with a bill for your time, but your unsolicited opinion on his real-life relationships is not relevant to this thread or his request. So far you haven't once addressed the OP, or even pretended you had an interest in saying anything that might be useful to him. Instead you gave some fascinating statistical data saying there's a 90% chance the OP is naive and/or spiteful. Thumbs up, superstar.

Never mind that 90% of people who come to this forum "explicitly asking for in-game solutions" to intraparty problems do such out of either naïveté or spite

And 96% of people disagree with you, since you're 100% wrong. Too bad, looks like my meaningless fake stats beat your meaningless fake stats.

the usual platitudes are the assumed right answer until proven otherwise.

Which was around the time he responded to said platitudes, said he did not want that kind of reply, and explicitly stated he only wanted "IN-GAME" solutions in all caps. Context, it's important.

[Sacrieur]

I've been looking into some metamagic:

[+0] Alternative Source Spell (Dragon #325): Prepare a spell as a divine spell for -1 CL.
Convince your Paladin that you're a wizard and can't cast divine spells, so it couldn't be you summoning the undead.

[+1] Deceptive Spell (Cityscape 60): Makes a spell appear to originate from a different direction.

[+3] Invisible Spell (Cityscape 61): The effects of your spell are invisible.
Convince your Paladin friend that you're actually a summoner just summoning evil outsiders and not raising the dead.

You can use the Misdirection spell to redirect the paladin to ping himself, but he would get a Will save. You can also use the Seeming spell to make your undead to seem like something else (no save unless interaction). Then there's always the Nondetection spell, which doesn't have a save.

Create a Fog Cloud to hide your undead.

The ultimate move here is Screen to hide all of your undead, which selective to just the areas where they appear, but it's a level eight spell.

---

There's likely bunches more, I only looked through the SRD spells. Not to mention all of the items you'd still have to go through that can play a role.

[AzraelX]

I've been looking into some metamagic:

[+0] Alternative Source Spell (Dragon #325): Prepare a spell as a divine spell for -1 CL.
Convince your Paladin that you're a wizard and can't cast divine spells, so it couldn't be you summoning the undead.

[+1] Deceptive Spell (Cityscape 60): Makes a spell appear to originate from a different direction.

[+3] Invisible Spell (Cityscape 61): The effects of your spell are invisible.
Convince your Paladin friend that you're actually a summoner just summoning evil outsiders and not raising the dead.

You can use the Misdirection spell to redirect the paladin to ping himself, but he would get a Will save. You can also use the Seeming spell to make your undead to seem like something else (no save unless interaction). Then there's always the Nondetection spell, which doesn't have a save.

Create a Fog Cloud to hide your undead.

The ultimate move here is Screen to hide all of your undead, which selective to just the areas where they appear, but it's a level eight spell.

---

There's likely bunches more, I only looked through the SRD spells. Not to mention all of the items you'd still have to go through that can play a role.

Oh wow, there's all kinds of great ideas here! There's clearly a lot of ways you could combine these solutions as well, especially with all the previous solutions (and those become near infinite if combined with RP solutions). The necromancer's going to have more contingencies than a 20th level wizard who filled every slot he could with Contingency.

Thanks for all the effort you put into making a constructive post It's appreciated!

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, it is. "I want IN-GAME solutions, to clarify" doesn't have any other meanings; adding "not [specific example he was replying to]" after it doesn't change that meaning. Giving an applicable example of something unwanted that was already said makes the meaning more explicit. That's how examples work.

I'm not sure how purposely skewed you had to make your understanding of English to conclude that giving an example of something invalidates the thing it's giving an example of.

The actual wording is ambiguous enough that it could mean 'I want a solution that isn't "play something else"', but I will agree that 'I want no OOC solutions at all' is a legitimate reading. The problem is, not wanting OOC solutions has been implied (I got it, but posted a short rundown just to be on the safe side), which not everybody is likely to pick up on.

Cool. They actually did do that before his post. It's nice of them to not continue doing that, since it was an explicit example of what he doesn't want in this thread.

Add to that the fact it was immediately preceded by "I want IN-GAME solutions, to clarify", and it's not real hard to puzzle out what solutions he does want in his thread. Context, it's important.

Actually, what he said was 'I want IN-GAME solutions' not 'I don't want out of character solutions'. Therefore, as long as you offer in-game solutions as well as OOC solutions you are technically fine with what has been said. I think an important part here is that we don't actually know if the OP has talked with his DM and the player (I'm assuming they had, but it's up in the air), and so people are defaulting to the 'try and sort it out of character' advice which is generally more helpful.

No, it isn't. That's just plain false. It's cute that you think you can advise him about his group dynamics better than he can advise himself, and that you think he needs to detail his real life so you can give him these great insights you have which you're sure are both super important and will be really enlightening to him.

Nah. Plenty of suggestions were given already, which actually answered his question. He'll use his own knowledge of the group and the paladin to decide what to use. He's clearly a big boy, and it's clear he can handle the player dynamics at his table better than you can.

How can you tell? Because he clarified in all caps that he wants "IN-GAME solutions". Context, it's important.


Sure. Too bad it's not your table, or your business. He isn't asking you for your expert advice on sociological topics. I'm sure you're one button press away from posting a scan of your PhD along with a bill for your time, but your unsolicited opinion on his real-life relationships is not relevant to this thread or his request. So far you haven't once addressed the OP, or even pretended you had an interest in saying anything that might be useful to him. Instead you gave some fascinating statistical data saying there's a 90% chance the OP is naive and/or spiteful. Thumbs up, superstar.

To be honest, I feel like Sith_Happens isn't giving advice because he doesn't know that, but is simply stating that in his experience most problems he's seen on this board have been solved with some variation of 'talk to the GM or players at fault'. As far as I can tell, the worst Sith has done is to defend the ability to offer possible OOC solutions until such a time as we get information that makes them useless (such as 'I spoke to the GM and player and they laughed at me and said it was my fault for playing such an evil character'). Sith has never actually said anything on the OP's real-life relationships, but has in fact offered examples of why OOC discussion might be useful (I personally think that it's more of a 'I forgot your concept' problem, but Sith brings up a good point that it could well be a player deliberately being disruptive).

And 96% of people disagree with you, since you're 100% wrong. Too bad, looks like my meaningless fake stats beat your meaningless fake stats.

And I'm 8% likely to support you. In fact, I'm going to say that Sith is correct, a good number of problems I find here are solved with 'talk about it OOC' or 'just leave the game if OOC stuff doesn't work'. I'm not surprised people are defaulting to OOC suggestions, because I've really seen a problem such as this which has a good chance of just being in-character and not OOC, and can be solved with entirely IC actions (I wouldn't be surprised if the paladin player had just forgotten or decided not to use that bit of the lore).

Which was around the time he responded to said platitudes, said he did not want that kind of reply, and explicitly stated he only wanted "IN-GAME" solutions in all caps. Context, it's important.

You are putting far to much importance on the implication rather than the actual wording. Yes, it is entirely legitimate to read it as 'no OOC solutions', and there's a good chance that it was intended that way, but there is also a good chance that by in-game he just meant 'I do not want to change my concept'. The key bit of context is that we are missing a lot of it.

Plus thanks for spotting my mistake a couple of posts back.

[Sacrieur]

This is ridiculous. Are we really arguing semantics over what the OP means. Did we all fail reading class or something?

---

I have another idea, convince the paladin that your zombies are actually part of your traveling dance routine. You put ranks into Perform to play an instrument and convince your paladin that your zombies are just disguised like zombies. When he asks why you can tell him...

Because you're not a necromancer, you're THE NECRODANCER. Show off all their zombie-like dance moves.

It'll work, trust me :p

[dream]

Necromancer's dance routine-explanation

After which, the Paladin will go Hulk on the scene & PvP abounds!

[ArendK]

Wizards as far as necromancers go are probably the better debuff and drain style compared to divine casters, but lose out on the 3rd level version of Animate Dead. Logically, blast away with enervation, ray of enfeeblement, ray of exhaustion, etc. etc. The OP said they are only 5th level; no animation going on yet anyways, as AD is a 4th level Wiz spell IIRC.

But if there's some shenanigans where AD is already in play (house rules, scrolls, etc. etc.), then I recommend ranks in disguise and alchemy. Disguise your undead as men at arms and use disguise to outfit them and cover them up appropriately, and Alchemy will keep flesh from falling off (or on, in skeletons case). No other mechanical benefit, and I'm sure the GM wouldn't object to that.

Inevtiably, I agree that just breaching the topic as character to character in the form of sincere friends (and hope that the player is either on the same page or not a douchenozzle) is the best way to go about it for the course of the game. It adds plot hooks, character relationships, and depth as well as verismilitude.

I have played good hearted necromancers before; I voluntarily dropped his alignment to neutral just for accepting the fact that his regular antics were not a goodly action, but he sincerely believed in using the undead he raised to help people. He also never raised a "humanoid" even though ogres, trolls, and the like were fair game. Part of his ethics and "respect" for life.