Necromancers...Who else wants them?

[mneme]

Felon: Actualy, I forgot the Seeker -- the second Primal controller -- but he breaks a lot of "rules" re controllers (by not having knowledge skills beyond Nature--mostly because he's also the only controller without an Intelligence build, and because he's as close as we get to a martial controller).

Most strikers have access to stealth -- but yeah, not by any means all. Avenger, Rogue, Ranger, Monk, and Assassin have it. Barbarian, Warlock, and Sorcerer don't.

Re the wizard being too broad -- she has close and area damage, movement reduction, monster summoning, every kind of damage imaginable, lockdown, illusions... To a large extent, flexibility is the wizard's -thing- (see the spellbook, the cantrips, easy access to rituals, and the book and wand implement types), but the broad array makes it harder to spec out dedicated illusionists, etc. And the fact that the wizard -- unlike every other implement using class -- has access to four distinct categories of implements really doesn't help. Each implement class is more or less associated with a different type of thing (holy symbol=religious; rod = class specialized beatdown, wand = single target zap, staff = area destruction, orb = area control, book = flexibility, totem = wand for nature classes); that a wizard has four of them emphasizes their flexibility.

Starting with the shaman and making it more controler-y (with, yes, closer-to-wizard implements--because wizards have access to all controller implements!) is a pretty good start, though.

 

[Obryn]

This looks like guilt by association. "Vecna does it, therefore it must be evil." Vecna probably does a lot of things that aren't inherently good or evil. He might eat Wheaties in the morning. Does that mean I shouldn't eat Wheaties?

I don't have a horse in this race, but I'd argue that the eating of wheaties is not core to his existence.

In this case, his divine portfolio involves the undead - not breakfast cereals!

Or - making undead isn't evil because Vecna is evil. Vecna, however, may be evil in part because he makes undead.

-O

 

[circadianwolf]

I thought Vecna was evil because he wants to kill everyone and rule the cosmology.

 

[Samir]

I don't have a horse in this race, but I'd argue that the eating of wheaties is not core to his existence.

In this case, his divine portfolio involves the undead - not breakfast cereals!

Or - making undead isn't evil because Vecna is evil. Vecna, however, may be evil in part because he makes undead.

-O

As circadianwolf said, I think it has more to do with his motives.

Necromancy in general is a bit tricky, because it's almost always associated with evil beings and evil acts. Here is what Open Grave has to say about it:

Someone who claims that undead are at heart
unaligned might be hiding something.

That said, if considered in isolation and without
context, some undead are not necessarily evil. Mind-
less undead in particular have no moral leanings one
way or the other. But in truth, agencies willing to dis-
honor the remains of living creatures by animating
them into walking corpses are usually up to no good.

But as with every rule, exceptions exist. Everyone
has heard tales of apparitions that warn the living
of hazards and impending disasters. Epic stories
speak of skeleton armies marching up out of crypts
in besieged cities to snatch away children and bear
them to safety. Whether such creatures acted of their
own accord or were compelled by an unseen control-
ler’s magic, none can say.

Mindless Undead: The simplest kinds of undead,
such as skeletons and zombies, have no psychological
traits. These beings are mindless creatures capable
of no more thought or emotion than a clockwork
mechanism.

Why can't one of those "exceptions" be a PC necromancer who animates mindless undead to fight for the greater good? The PCs, as the PHB harps, are exceptional, one-of-a-kind folk, and this really isn't a stretch.

 

[Klaus]

I seem to recall a very honorable character from a beloved fantasy book who led an army of undead to do battle against the forces of evil.

If I could only remember his name...

Oh yeah, him.

 

[Zaran]

That doesn't make him a necromancer.

 

[Samir]

That doesn't make him a necromancer.

No, but that does mean people who use undead to fight evil can be heroic.

But all this is kind of irrelevant. The Diablo universe has straight up heroic necromancers. It's been done before. That's not really the issue.

The question is, can a heroic necromancer class fit into the 4e core setting? Based on Open Grave, yes, I think so.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That doesn't make him a necromancer.

No, but that does mean people who use undead to fight evil can be heroic.

And that intelligent undead are not universally, inherently and irrevocably evil.

Which implies that there are certain circumstances under which the creation or the act of becoming undead is not evil either.

Thus leaving a gap for a Necromancer in 4Ed's "no yucky evil PCs" design theme.

 

[Ahglock]

Given that one of the epic destinies is non-inherently evil lich I'd say you can be a heroic undead character. Animate dead is already a spell for wizards and taking it does not make you evil. Does focusing on it somehow always make you evil? I think not.

 

[Jhaelen]

And that intelligent undead are not universally, inherently and irrevocably evil.

Well, yeah, kind of. Starting with 3e all undead - with the notable exception of vampires - were given an evil alignment, even the non-intelligent ones. It's not a development I agree with.

But then I don't like the concept of alignments, anyway. Good riddance and welcome to our heroic necromancer overlords!