No Animate Dead?

[Particle_Man]

Sorry, those books are not core/SRD.

And now Animate Dead is not core in 4e! Suck it up, fanboy!

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Thanks for the link to the "economy of actions" article. I think they should have made that explicit in the rules themselves; it really helps clarify a lot of different decisions they made.

This is either a failure of my imagination or me having already internalized 4e more than I thought, but my first thought when this topic came up was "Why would you even want to bother; they'd just be minions, so they wouldn't be that useful." But I guess that goes back to economy of actions -- having 3 or 4 moves per turn when everyone else has one just feels funky to me.

If I were going to hack in necromancy to the RAW, I'd probably handle it like the pseudo-summons or some of the continuing effects. The skeletons lurching around at your command would just be there for color until you used your own powers to command them to attack. Reminds me of the idea someone had in one of the familiars threads about having the special effect of Ghost Hand be your familiar grabbing the object or whatnot.

 

[Korgoth]

I think the whole "economy of actions" thing misses the point. If they can't make a game that incorporates the Animate Dead spell, they have Failed. Coming up with buzzwords doesn't change that basic fact.

I was interested in running a Sword and Sorcery game, drawing heavily from Clark A. Smith. Necromancy would be the single most important type of magic. Now I'm hearing that my imagination is incompatible with WOTC's corporate approved fantasy template.

I'm starting to worry that 4E really is inspired by the Forge. The whole "this game does exactly one thing and if you don't want to do exactly that one thing then it is not for you." That's a recipe for failure that requires a whole stick of fail to cook up.

 

[robertliguori]

However, the example of the Holy Word is utterly false. Casting Holy Word is a good act. It has the [Good] descriptor. Killing babies is an evil act. It has the [Evil] descriptor. D ) However, the Holy Word example conflates two separate actions.

OTOH, casting Animate Dead is simply an evil act. What you do with them afterwards is irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that casting this spell is an evil act. That you use your undead (neutral evil) minions to save babies doesn't matter.

Alignment is never retroactive. What you do after a given act in no way changes the alignment of the first act. Casting Holy Word is a good act. End of story. Those you harm with that spell don't change the alignment of that act.

I'm...not really seeing the point of the discussion here. The point of my example is that when you have a system that says "Taking this action which kills babies but involves blue, shiny energy is Good." and "Taking this other action that saves babies but involves scary black energy is Evil.", then Good and Evil have ceased to mean anything but compass headings on the Great Wheel, and no character should consider his Good or Evil status a definite indicator of actual morality any more than he should his preference for Air spells over Earth spells. Moreover, in such a universe, the only reason that a given society would reward Good versus Evil is simple preference; there are pretty much no behaviors left that can be shoehorned into either side, once killing disinterested innocents wantonly is Good and spending personal resources to protect them is Evil.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

The whole "this game does exactly one thing and if you don't want to do exactly that one thing then it is not for you." That's a recipe for failure that requires a whole stick of fail to cook up.

Why?

Serious question, why is that a recipe for failure?

If you mean you don't like that approach, that's cool. But I've heard this argument before and I've never heard anyone say why they think so.

Clearly they don't care whether or not people who want to run fantasy RPGs in a way unsupported by the 4e books buy them or not.

 

[theNater]

I think the whole "economy of actions" thing misses the point. If they can't make a game that incorporates the Animate Dead spell, they have Failed. Coming up with buzzwords doesn't change that basic fact.

I was interested in running a Sword and Sorcery game, drawing heavily from Clark A. Smith. Necromancy would be the single most important type of magic. Now I'm hearing that my imagination is incompatible with WOTC's corporate approved fantasy template.

You can animate dead in 4th edition. Check the cleric powers Astral Defenders(9) and Knights of Unyielding Valor(10). They summon ghosts!

If you're willing to reflavor abilities, Bigby's Icy Grasp(wizard 5) can become Bigby's Frozen Skeleton. And I don't see anything in the rules that says that Mordenkainen's Sword(wizard 9) can't be wielded by a zombie that has insufficient force of personality to hold a square of his own.

 

[Hussar]

I'm...not really seeing the point of the discussion here. The point of my example is that when you have a system that says "Taking this action which kills babies but involves blue, shiny energy is Good." and "Taking this other action that saves babies but involves scary black energy is Evil.", then Good and Evil have ceased to mean anything but compass headings on the Great Wheel, and no character should consider his Good or Evil status a definite indicator of actual morality any more than he should his preference for Air spells over Earth spells. Moreover, in such a universe, the only reason that a given society would reward Good versus Evil is simple preference; there are pretty much no behaviors left that can be shoehorned into either side, once killing disinterested innocents wantonly is Good and spending personal resources to protect them is Evil.

Nope. You missed the point. There are two separate distinct events occurring here. One is the action of casting the spell and the second is the results of that spell.

Take fireball. Fireball has no alignment attached to it. I can cast fireball all day long and it will have no effect on my alignment. However, if I kill orphans, regardless of how (in this case, using a fireball spell), I have committed an evil act.

Now Holy Word, OTOH, has alignment attached to it. If I were to cast Holy Word all day long, I would actually be performing Good acts. However, if I kill orphans, regardless of how (in this case, using a Holy Word spells) I have committed an evil act.

In the case of Animate Dead, it has the Evil descriptor. Casting Animate Dead is an intrinsically evil act, in and of itself. Regardless of what I do with my zombie minions afterwards, casting Animate Dead is an evil act. If I then use my zombie minions to save a burning orphanage, I have then performed a good act, but, that does not retroactively change my original evil act of animating dead.

 

[Ahglock]

Is the loss of economy of actions with summons and undead, any worse than the loss of economy of action any time a area of effect spell is cast?

How is my 3 dire badgers make basic attacks, and are 1 HP minion wanders any slower to process than rolling 12 times to hit with a fireball or a enlarged dragonborn breath etc.

It seems to me like they removed a lot of cool effects for a premise they don't actually support.

 

[Particle_Man]

Each of those Dire Badgers can be hit themselves, so you keep track of their hit points. They might do other things than simply attack for damage. They can be moved (to provide flank).

The "I roll 12 dice for fireball attacks vs. 12 dudes" is not more complex than the DM prevsiously rolling 12 dice for 12 dudes' saving throws vs. fireball. And because they are minions, as per your example, you don't even have to roll for damage.

 

[DandD]

Is the loss of economy of actions with summons and undead, any worse than the loss of economy of action any time a area of effect spell is cast?

How is my 3 dire badgers make basic attacks, and are 1 HP minion wanders any slower to process than rolling 12 times to hit with a fireball or a enlarged dragonborn breath etc.

It seems to me like they removed a lot of cool effects for a premise they don't actually support.

How can you be sure that all you summoned for was some badger minion who gets sicked by one hit and does some meager damage? Also, if you get to roll 12 times with a fireball, you really deserve to be rolling 12 times, because you managed to hit a fireballing wizard's biggest wish... A target location cramped by idiots standing all together. Million times better than any summoning spell. Most times, you'd get three or four at best...