Necromancers...Who else wants them?

[mkill]

In a nutshell, a true necromancer is the last fantasy archetype that's not a D&D 4th edition class yet. Everything else is pretty much covered, either as a class or as a build. And the necromancer is more iconic than, say, the invoker, the seeker or the ardent.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Well Goodman Games has a book with a Necromancer class in it.

 

[Felon]

I myself prefer a Necromancer defender. With a permanent pet doing the defending, similar to beast mastery.

One permanent pet? The major distinction that I can think of between a necromancer and other summoners is that they don't have just one creature at their disposal. They have gangs of zombies and skeletons. Kinda of a quantity versus quality trade-off.

Necromancers should exist in 4Ed. End of story.

In a nutshell, a true necromancer is the last fantasy archetype that's not a D&D 4th edition class yet. Everything else is pretty much covered, either as a class or as a build. And the necromancer is more iconic than, say, the invoker, the seeker or the ardent.

The necromancer is an iconic villain, and villainous necromancers certainly exist in D&D...as NPC's. Haven't heard anything yet that really justifies a class unto itself. Kinda like the samurai argument.

However, far be it for me to pee in everyone's Wheaties, so I'll elaborate on my precious thoughts. As has been stated, wizards already have necromancy spells. The only thing to add there would be summoning spells that create a gang of minions. What would be really cool is if such a spell had the folllowing:

Sustain Minor: Summon one more minion

That way the necromancer could potentially sumon up to three more every round.

 

[Piratecat]

The necromancer is an iconic villain, and villainous necromancers certainly exist in D&D...as NPC's.

No, I don't buy that one bit. It's the same logic people used to justify removing the assassin from 2e. The assassin is definitely an iconic villain as well.. but it's also a description of a certain kind of hero, one that seems to work just fine in D&D.

I've played heroic necromancers, and I found them fun. I definitely want the class for 4e.

 

[Mort_Q]

One permanent pet? The major distinction that I can think of between a necromancer and other summoners is that they don't have just one creature at their disposal. They have gangs of zombies and skeletons. Kinda of a quantity versus quality trade-off.

I'm skeptical that this can be done in a balanced way in terms of the economy of actions in 4e.

Perhaps they are more like movable obstacles rather than having much for attacks.

 

[interwyrm]

I'm skeptical that this can be done in a balanced way in terms of the economy of actions in 4e.

Perhaps they are more like movable obstacles rather than having much for attacks.

Night of the Living Dead
You create an uprising of necrotic energy, causing long dead corpses to burst out of the ground. The grab your opponents and tear at their skulls, groaning for brains.

Necromancer Daily
Area Burst 3
Attack: Int vs. Fort
Hit: 3d8 necrotic damage
Effect: Creates an area burst 3 zone. Make a secondary attack
Attack: Int vs. AC
Hit: 2d8 damage and the target is immobilized until the next turn.
Sustain Minor: You may move the center of the zone up to 5 squares. Repeat the secondary attack.

I think I've got some of the wording wrong, but something like this would be a nice high level controller daily that keeps the flavor of a necromancer.

I do like the idea of having a persistent single pet. At-wills could be a mix of ranged necrotic beams and pet attacks. I don't see the necromancer having effective at -will minion killers. Encounters would be more debilitating things like flensing the skin off an enemy. Dailies would almost exclusively be summons.

 

[Mort_Q]

That's good, but that isn't the gangs of zombies and skeletons I was commenting on. As fluff for powers, be they bursts (or walls), the undead certainly work.

I had much the same thoughts when I was wondering what the druid would be like.

 

[Chimera]

I've played heroic necromancers, and I found them fun. I definitely want the class for 4e.

Paging Dr. Byron Orpheus.

 

[Piratecat]

Paging Dr. Byron Orpheus.

Pretty much! Although mine (way back in 2e) sounded like Peter Lorre and had a skeletal squirrel for a familiar. One of the most fun throwaway characters I've ever played.

 

[Wik]

For that matter I'm not really all that convinced that there is a real strong tradition of necromancers in D&D. No such class existed pre-3.x for sure. 2e added in a bunch of options in its later days but I don't recall a class that was focused on necromancy. At best it was a kit or some options and honestly I don't recall anyone in any group I ever played in or ran that ever made one. The concept was not unknown, but its never been a really significant element of the game as a PC option.

Sorry, but you're misremembering.

2e definitely had necromancers, in the original Player's Handbook. They were one of the eight original schools of specialization, though they didn't get much in the way of spells until the Tome of Magic was released. There was also the Complete Book of Wizards, which gave more Necromancy love. And then, of course, there was the Complete Book of Necromancers, which was entirely focused on Necros... as villains. So yeah, there was a 2e Necromancer "Class". You could argue that it was really just a subclass of wizard, but then you'd just as readily be arguing that ranger was a subclass of fighter, which is technically true (but realistically wrong).

As for 3e, we had the same situation - Necros were available right out the gate as a variant wizard. and we had plenty of rules that expanded upon this - feat choices, and the excellent specialist wizard possibilities found in UA. And Heroes of Horror had a "Dread Necromancer" class that seemed okay in play... I think we had one for a while in our Savage Tide game, but I don't really remember how it worked in actual play (the player had a Cleric running for a while, and was a warlock before the dread necro, so the actual necro part is a complete haze).