It also feels that the themes and processes for spell traditions are repeatedly broken for the sake of creating loopholes in earlier iterations of the game - e.g., a conjuration/transmutation spell that is effectively an evocation attack spell that the Conjurer/Transmuter can cast, etc. - and these oddities have been preserved mostly for the sake of tradition than consistentcy. Not to mention the bizarre refusal by WotC to make healing a type of Necromancy.
I don't think even Sorcerers have the design space and I am once again referring people to Worlds Without Number's Necromancer or alternatively, to Gideon the Ninth.
Yeah I'm aware, they don't have to be actual attackers with separate statlines and stuff (beyond the one permanent one), and this is why I'm saying separate class, because then you can meld the class in such a way that the action economy works with what they've got.
Usually when a survey takes more than 5-10 minutes (as this one does) without an incentive, people just stop halfway and you have tons of nonresponse bias to address (they lack the extra detail about respondents to address it).
I imagine that it would not be too difficult to simply have minions work akin to temporary spell effects like Spirit Guardians, Evard's Tendrils, etc.
My only conceptual concern would be if somebody raised an actual zombie (similar to other zombies my character had encountered) they would expect to be able to target/combat that creature.
Yea I can't believe they thought something this in depth was a good idea.
well, I did.
I feel I don't really agree with your vision of necromancer. To me it seems completely absurd to suggest that they would not be full casters.
fundamentally what people want is a full caster who is good, question what bits of necromancer is best as spells and which are best as abilities?
Sorcerers have a lot more design space than people normally realise, and there are between one and three subclasses that even attempt to use it. The divine sorcerer, the clockwork soul (which I'd need to see in play), and the Aberrant Mind which is a full bore psion. Limiting the size of spell lists in reality really expands what can be done with the sorcerer and warlock because they don't have the ability to do everything.
I agree, particularly re: Warlock.
That seems like a weird viewpoint. I guess you think all magic in D&D has to go via spell slot? And other people than Necromancers should have access to all the magic the Necromancer does? And full caster also suggests a broad spell list.
okay, can you define the necromancer archetype so we can see each other's position?
Most of it yes. Also, necromancer is explicitly a magician, they cast spells. And in D&D people who are full time magicians are full casters. Waht you seem to be talking about is more like some sort of death knight, a necromantic version of paladin.
Not necessarily. There can be bespoke spells for classes and subclasses.
Again, not necessarily. But then again, I don't necessarily think that being a necromancer means that you're casting necromancy spells only.
What portrayals?
I feel the same way. It looks like a psion, feels like a psion, and casts like a psion (even moreso if you use the Spell Points rule in the DMG). The only thing it's missing is a silent P in the name...and that's apparently a deal-breaker for lots of folks.
One of my favorites:
Not so. What you need is some sort of Necromantic Metamagic that, for example, lets the necromancer animate more, bigger, or smarter dead than usual or to throw necrotic fireballs or turn mage armour into bone armour.
Which get soaked for a necromancer by things like Animate Dead.
That is very much debatable.
When literally half the spell you know are tailored for a necromancer (seriously, the Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul give two known spells per level) then that doesn't matter so much.
