Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nichwee" data-source="post: 5490408" data-attributes="member: 84242">I find it odd that peeps are surprised tha a Necro is a Wizard. It always has been, and I expectted it to always remain so. Wizard is often where summoning goes, so the &quot;army of undead&quot; is a Wizzy thing imo. Otherwise a Necro is just a &quot;cleric of death&quot; (which was the best way to do the classic &quot;army of undead&quot; in 3.5 as it happens).I do see you could have a strong Leader secondary role to Necros but they have a real issue as a Leader primary imo. I don't see a way, in their feel, to let them heal without hurting others first - unless they do just become &quot;Cleric with necrotic powers&quot; to keep Healing Word (or an equivalent).This could be considered no biggie (Like the idea suggested by Insight) but then you have the problem that if a person is dying they can't hit anything to get healing, and if the Necro has a bad string of misses (or is debffed) the dying PC may not recieve healing in time. One of the best things about 4E healing was they allowed a Leader to attack and heal such that they didn't interfere with each other - and I see no way to get this to work for a Necro Leader without sacrificing the feel of a Necro (I can't think of Necro Heals that aren't lifestealing in some way). I suppose they could have a self-sacrifice heal to cover these situations but that would just make them a poor healer, as they would need to then heal themselves straight afterwards.You could treat a Necro heal as a &quot;inspiring with fear&quot; thing, but that just makes them a scary Warlord imo. So I say again, I don't see how to make a Necro Leader a pure class without it beign a currently existing Leader with minor refluffing - so imo it works better as a sub-class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nichwee, post: 5490408, member: 84242"] I find it odd that peeps are surprised tha a Necro is a Wizard. It always has been, and I expectted it to always remain so. Wizard is often where [I]summoning[/I] goes, so the "army of undead" is a Wizzy thing imo. Otherwise a Necro is just a "cleric of death" (which was the best way to do the classic "army of undead" in 3.5 as it happens). I do see you could have a strong Leader secondary role to Necros but they have a real issue as a Leader primary imo. I don't see a way, in their feel, to let them heal without hurting others first - unless they do just become "Cleric with necrotic powers" to keep Healing Word (or an equivalent). This could be considered no biggie (Like the idea suggested by Insight) but then you have the problem that if a person is dying they can't hit anything to get healing, and if the Necro has a bad string of misses (or is debffed) the dying PC may not recieve healing in time. One of the best things about 4E healing was they allowed a Leader to attack and heal such that they didn't interfere with each other - and I see no way to get this to work for a Necro Leader without sacrificing the feel of a Necro (I can't think of Necro Heals that aren't lifestealing in some way). I suppose they could have a self-sacrifice heal to cover these situations but that would just make them a poor healer, as they would need to then heal themselves straight afterwards. You could treat a Necro heal as a "inspiring with fear" thing, but that just makes them a scary Warlord imo. So I say again, I don't see how to make a Necro Leader a pure class without it beign a currently existing Leader with minor refluffing - so imo it works better as a sub-class. [/QUOTE]

Verification