D&D 5E DM advice: Necromancers, Undead, and Attunement

[Hawk Diesel]

And a human hireling?
There is nothing said about intelligence, race, souls... the rules talk about creatures and prerequisites, I don't see the problem, a skeleton should be able to don an armor, the same as a hireling elf, human, orc, etc.

A human hireling is different. They are not a slave to the player's will. A human hireling could decide they don't want to fight to the death, or that the bargain that keeps them with the party is not good enough, or they could decide to slink away in the night with that item they were given. The same cannot be said for a skeletal minion.

And yes, while there technically is no distinction made between an intelligent creature attuning something and just a creature, the description of attunement seems to indicate that whoever is attuning the item must be able to learn about its nature in some way. It must be able to sense out the magic and learn to use it, which may also include the use of command words and such. Most undead minions (zombies and skeletons) cannot speak. Also, they cannot learn or understand, nor do they have any kind of will to exercise upon magic to guide or focus it (This makes sense to me as a fan of the Dresden Files). Undead minions cannot act independently and they cannot execute more than simple commands. They can't problem solve or develop tactics outside "Stay here and hit things that try to pass" or "go hit that thing" or "go pull that lever." Their level of intelligence is such that it allows them understanding of rudimentary commands and ability to identify what they see to some extent, and assess threat to some extent, but from my perspective anything more complex is beyond most undead minions.

A ghoul or ghast is a different story, and maybe some exceptions to skeletons and zombies (Eberron's Karnathi Skeletons/Zombies anyone?). But overall, I would say there is something lacking in most skeletons and zombies that is significant enough to prohibit attunement. But that's just my take.

 

[thethain]

A human hireling is different. They are not a slave to the player's will. A human hireling could decide they don't want to fight to the death, or that the bargain that keeps them with the party is not good enough, or they could decide to slink away in the night with that item they were given. The same cannot be said for a skeletal minion.

And yes, while there technically is no distinction made between an intelligent creature attuning something and just a creature, the description of attunement seems to indicate that whoever is attuning the item must be able to learn about its nature in some way. It must be able to sense out the magic and learn to use it, which may also include the use of command words and such. Most undead minions (zombies and skeletons) cannot speak. Also, they cannot learn or understand, nor do they have any kind of will to exercise upon magic to guide or focus it (This makes sense to me as a fan of the Dresden Files). Undead minions cannot act independently and they cannot execute more than simple commands. They can't problem solve or develop tactics outside "Stay here and hit things that try to pass" or "go hit that thing" or "go pull that lever." Their level of intelligence is such that it allows them understanding of rudimentary commands and ability to identify what they see to some extent, and assess threat to some extent, but from my perspective anything more complex is beyond most undead minions.

A ghoul or ghast is a different story, and maybe some exceptions to skeletons and zombies (Eberron's Karnathi Skeletons/Zombies anyone?). But overall, I would say there is something lacking in most skeletons and zombies that is significant enough to prohibit attunement. But that's just my take.

The skeleton isn't a slave to the necromancers will, he is just controlled for 24 hours. The necromancer just KEEPS casting the spell. If you had the spell slots you could keep dominating a human.

RAW: Skeleton is a creature, if you want to give it magic items, knock yourself out. If it has any verbal components ("Say the activation word, like flying broom") well the skeleton can't speak so out of luck there.

Honestly I don't see much balance concern here as you are entrusting a magic item to a CR 1/4 thing. Now if magic items abound so much in your campaign he can outfit an army of skeletons, probably the issue is something else, but they still all die to 1 fireball.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

The skeleton isn't a slave to the necromancers will, he is just controlled for 24 hours. The necromancer just KEEPS casting the spell. If you had the spell slots you could keep dominating a human.

Yes, true that it technically only lasts 24 hours and after that skeleton will act on its own accord. But even then I don't see skeletons being capable of attuning to or effectively using magic items that grant anything more than passive enhancements.

And personally, I would rule something similar with dominated humans. For me, the component of will is necessary to activate magic and shape it. Once someone's will is taken from them, they can no longer attune new items (but I would say any items already attuned would continue to function, since the magic has already been activated and once done, the magic is already shaped and self-sustaining). A thrall (such as a GOO warlock can create) is also different. Personally, I would say such creatures have been corrupted to the point that they do have will and can attune, but it has been twisted to submit to the controlling entity.

I also recognize this stance creates a slippery slope with spellcasting. But one could say that the ability to create a well of power for spell creation and the learning to shape spells with an action was the initial will needed to get the magic, and once yours it becomes a part of you. Or you could say that because the magic of magic items is more external or not native to you makes the need for will to shape, control, and command it more necessary.

Of course, these are all my interpretations. While there is certainly nothing in RAW that I am aware of that would prohibit a skeleton from attuning to a magic item, it is also true that this edition was specifically made to give more ability for the DM to adjudicate his/her own interpretations. Based on how skeletons and zombies have been treated in previous editions as mindless undead and lacking any kind of will of their own, I think that may color how people (or at least I) interpret RAI, which does not always line up well with RAW.

I'm less concerned about the balance aspect. But I do worry about the aspect of fun for the players at the table. If it is more fun for everyone that skeletons and minions can attune to items and you are capable as a DM to handle that power to keep the players challenged, then go for it. But if other players start becoming annoyed or feel it is starting to become unfair that the necromancer is controlling very worthy guards rather than disposable cannon fodder (as I believe undead minions are generally supposed to function), and this begins to steal away from the other players as feeling the spotlight taken from them, then it's worth a conversation with the table as to how people feel and whether some kind of compromise or alternative ruling is more fair.

 

[Dausuul]

Personally, I would say that unintelligent undead cannot attune magic items. However, I would allow the necromancer to use one of his own attunement slots for the undead minion to make full use of the item.

I like this solution. Very elegant.

 

[Alexemplar]

The skeleton isn't a slave to the necromancers will, he is just controlled for 24 hours. The necromancer just KEEPS casting the spell. If you had the spell slots you could keep dominating a human.

RAW: Skeleton is a creature, if you want to give it magic items, knock yourself out. If it has any verbal components ("Say the activation word, like flying broom") well the skeleton can't speak so out of luck there.

Honestly I don't see much balance concern here as you are entrusting a magic item to a CR 1/4 thing. Now if magic items abound so much in your campaign he can outfit an army of skeletons, probably the issue is something else, but they still all die to 1 fireball.

Well there is a difference in that those spells are totally different. In order to keep someone permanently enslaved, you need to be a 17th level spellcaster and give up all your 9th and 8th level spell slots. In order to keep a single skeleton permenantly enslaved, you only need to be 5th level and have give up a single 3rd level slot.

Having an undead slave that follows your every command is way way cheaper and easier than having a living one.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

And a human hireling?

I can't imagine hiring a mere human to accompany me on a dreadful quest where they would face almost certain death. Their life is worth more than that. If I can't find a hero capable of surviving such perils, then I'm better off going alone.

There is nothing said about intelligence, race, souls... the rules talk about creatures and prerequisites, I don't see the problem, a skeleton should be able to don an armor, the same as a hireling elf, human, orc, etc.

What is the in-game reality which corresponds to the game mechanic of attuning an item? Once you answer that, then you can consider the question of whether a skeleton or a rat is capable of performing that action. And since that question is not addressed in the rule book, it's something which you should expect to vary by table.

 

[Mephista]

Why is it always a human hireling? Gnome hirelings are where its at!

 

[dco]

I can't imagine hiring a mere human to accompany me on a dreadful quest where they would face almost certain death. Their life is worth more than that. If I can't find a hero capable of surviving such perils, then I'm better off going alone.

That's only one example, not related to rules. The PHB comes with another example and I'm not sure why some mercenaries would prefer not to use magic items to fight some hobgoblins if their life is important.

What is the in-game reality which corresponds to the game mechanic of attuning an item? Once you answer that, then you can consider the question of whether a skeleton or a rat is capable of performing that action. And since that question is not addressed in the rule book, it's something which you should expect to vary by table.

If the book says a creature can attune to an item then that is RAW, but at the end all depends on the DM and the players.

Well there is a difference in that those spells are totally different. In order to keep someone permanently enslaved, you need to be a 17th level spellcaster and give up all your 9th and 8th level spell slots. In order to keep a single skeleton permenantly enslaved, you only need to be 5th level and have give up a single 3rd level slot.


Having an undead slave that follows your every command is way way cheaper and easier than having a living one.

But those spells can let the player control better creatures and other players, and other classes have other powers. But perhaps now the sorcerer is overpowered because using one sorcery point spell duration is doubled.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

If the book says a creature can attune to an item then that is RAW, but at the end all depends on the DM and the players.

That's the thing. It's not clear that the book says a creature can attune to an item. Whether or not it actually says that is left open to the interpretation of the DM. Here are the relevant sections of that text:

Attuning to an item requires a creature to spend a short rest focused on only that item while being in physical contact with it (this can’t be the same short rest used to learn the item’s properties). This focus can take the form of weapon practice, meditation, or some other appropriate activity. If the short rest is interrupted, the attunement attempt fails. Otherwise, at the end of the short rest, the creature gains an intuitive understanding of how to activate any magical properties of the item, including any necessary command words.

A creature’s attunement to an item ends if the creature no longer satisfies the prerequisites for attunement, if the item has been more than 100 feet away for at least 24 hours, if the creature dies, or if another creature attunes to the item. A creature can also voluntarily end attunement by spending another short rest focused on the item, unless the item is cursed.

So, in order for a creature to be attuned to an item, it must meet all of the following requirements:

• The creature must be capable of focusing on an object for at least an hour.
• The creature must have a physical form which is capable of being in contact with that item.
• The creature must be capable of weapon practice, meditation, or whatever activity the DM determines is appropriate for the specific item.
• The creature cannot spend more than 24 hours away from the item.
• The creature cannot die at any point.
• Another creature cannot attune to the item.

This is RAW. You're free to change it at your own table if you don't like it, but these are the rules currently being discussed.

So, is a skeleton capable of focusing on an object for at least an hour? What does the DM determine is the appropriate way of focusing on this magic armor, and is a skeleton capable of doing that? Given the ambiguous text, can a creature maintain attunement for any period of time, if it is already dead?

I can guarantee you that different DMs will answer those questions differently, and all answers will be equally RAW since they are all derived from the same text.

 

[Lenny J]

From the RAW:

Some magic items require a creature to form a bond with them before their magical properties can be used. This bond is called attunement, and certain items have a prerequisite for it. If the prerequisite is a class, a creature must be a member of that class to attune to the item. (If the class is a Spellcasting class, a monster qualifies if it has Spell Slots and uses that class’s spell list.) If the prerequisite is to be a spellcaster, a creature qualifies if it can cast at least one spell using its traits or features, not using a magic item or the like.

Without becoming attuned to an item that requires attunement, a creature gains only its nonmagical benefits, unless its description states otherwise. For example, a magic Shield that requires attunement provides the benefits of a normal Shield to a creature not attuned to it, but none of its magical properties.

Attuning to an item requires a creature to spend a Short Rest focused on only that item while being in physical contact with it (this can’t be the same short rest used to learn the item’s properties). This focus can take the form of weapon practice (for a weapon), meditation (for a wondrous item), or some other appropriate activity. If the Short Rest is interrupted, the attunement attempt fails. Otherwise, at the end of the Short Rest, the creature gains an intuitive understanding of how to activate any magical properties of the item, including any necessary Command words.

An item can be attuned to only one creature at a time, and a creature can be attuned to no more than three magic items at a time. Any attempt to attune to a fourth item fails; the creature must end its attunement to an item first. Additionally, a creature can’t attune to more than one copy of an item. For example, a creature can’t attune to more than one Ring of Protection at a time.

A creature’s attunement to an item ends if the creature no longer satisfies the Prerequisites for attunement, if the item has been more than 100 feet away for at least 24 hours, if the creature dies, or if another creature attunes to the item. A creature can also voluntarily end attunement by spending another Short Rest focused on the item, unless the item is cursed.



With the above being written in the books, then by the book, the skeleton is a creature and therefore can attune, however in our games we house-ruled no, because in our world "attuning" is binding one's soul to the object, so I would say it depends on your setting honestly.