Nercomancers get ALL the love

Necros are cool.

Plain and simple. They're a significant 'culture' diffrent from convention spellcasters (diviners, evokers, conjurers, abjurers, transmuters). While they can have distinct flavor (and it is easy enough to expand one out), necros just tend to be further seperate from the conventional wizards (how often do you see someone thrown out of Wizards cheesy school for practicing Divination?).

The necromancer books tend to worry me however, as they have the potential to heavily skew the Specialist School balance (Necromancy only costs 2 to specialize for a good reason).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

reiella said:
The necromancer books tend to worry me however, as they have the potential to heavily skew the Specialist School balance (Necromancy only costs 2 to specialize for a good reason).



This is one of the things I wish they had done differently in 3rd edition. I wish they had made all of the schools balanced with the same penalty to specialize for each. As it stands they either have to publish very little of interest for the smaller schools or they can just blow the balance between the schools out of the water, which is what is happening as far as I am concerned and not just with specialist products, but with spell compendiums like Magic of Faerun.

[edit: I also wish they hadn't decided that spells could be in one school only, by including spells in multiple schools it becomes easier to balance things and it would really flesh out and return some of the flavor to certain schools. ]
 
Last edited:

s/LaSH said:
And yet Final Fantasy doesn't sell millions of copies because of some guy reanimating his enemies for half a combat. I've always thought conjuring up monsters was cool...
...which is what Pokémon (which sells/sold quite well as well) is all about, too. :cool:
 
Last edited:

necromancy

I was disapointed that they did away with universial spells in 3e, spells like identify, dispell magic, teleport and such really should be available to all wizards. that said it really shouldn't surprise anyone that the school of necromancy is growing both in spells as well as supliments. if you had a lot of the supliments from 2e then you will surely remember that necromancy was one of the top 2 schools in raw damage or "jack the party" type spells. in 3e then cut it down to less than 1/5 of what it was. the same goes for evocation. so its no surprise to me that the black arts are coming back strong.

embrace the Dark Side
 
Last edited:

San,

Universal is still a school in 3e, check out detect magic (not a divination) and permanency. It just includes less than it used to.
 


Universal isn't intended to be a "school" per se, but a simple list of spells that all wizards, specialist and otherwise, should probably have. The idea of a "specialist in Universal" is silly! Note there are some higher level spells on that list, such as Permanency and Wish.
 

well, it is a little more than that, and every wizard knows at least four:

0
Univ Arcane Mark Inscribes a personal rune (visible or invisible).
Detect Magic Detects spells and magic items within 60 ft.
Prestidigitation Performs minor tricks.
Read Magic Read scrolls and spellbooks.
5
Univ Permanency Makes certain spells permanent; costs XP.
7
Univ Limited Wish Alters reality-within spell limits.
8
Univ Symbol Triggered runes have array of effects.
9
Univ Wish As limited wish, but with fewer limits.

Well now, almost as many spells as a domain, how can you not call that a respectable school?
 

Well, here's my admittedly biased two cents:

Necromancy has a powerful fantasy and mythological tradition outside the context of D&D. Decades before Gary Gygax ever thought, "hey, wouldn't a wargame be cool if you could fight trolls and dragons?", fantasy authors like Robert E. Howard and Lord Dunsany were using the terms "necromancy" and "necromancers" in their work. Even Tolkien used it (remember Sauron's time spent undercover, known simply as "The Necromancer"?). There's just so much more inspirational source material than there is for something much more generic like transmutation.

For all that players often like to choose schools like evocation, evocation doesn't mean what it means in D&D anywhere but D&D. "Boom spell mages," who are pretty much unheard of in most fantasy, literary and mythical traditions, are usually "fire mages" or the like when they appear. Elementalists have more of a life outside the D&D context than evokers do. (My version of Microsoft Word doesn't even recognize "evoker" as a word.)

The division of spell schools in D&D has always been on a very technical level; that's why you have "conjuration" instead of "summoning." This makes for more accurate rulespeak, but at the cost of some of the flavor that draws people on more than a technical level. It's probably no coincidence that the PS2 features games like "Summoner 2" instead of "Conjurer 2"; "summoner" sounds better. It's more limiting, but more appealing to the wider audience. (See also "transmutation" and "alchemy"; the latter is more limited, but much more widely known.)

This may seem like a silly concern when you figure that most of the D&D book-buying audience doesn't worry as much about that wider appeal, but let's face it; store managers who don't necessarily play D&D may be more interested in stocking titles that sound "classic fantasy." Newbies to the hobby might be drawn in by the idea of playing a necromancer in ways that an abjurer wouldn't hook them. There are advantages to supporting the schools that have strong visual images already built-in, instead of trying to base your book on the rules strengths of a school and hoping that will be enough to sell it. And of all those schools, necromancy has the strongest visual language, with maybe the exception of enchantment (and even then, that's based more on classic legendary enchantresses like Morgan la Fey than legendary enchanters like... uh... well, I guess you take my meaning).

Besides, necromancy is the school of choice for players and DMs who have tons of skeleton and zombie miniatures. That's what helped me make my decision.
 

universal

Squire James said:
Universal isn't intended to be a "school" per se, but a simple list of spells that all wizards, specialist and otherwise, should probably have. The idea of a "specialist in Universal" is silly! Note there are some higher level spells on that list, such as Permanency and Wish.

I agree what I am saying is some spells should be available to all mages reguardless of school. among those are dispell magic and teleport
 

Remove ads

Top