No Animate Dead?

[Ahglock]

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...

I can't be sure it will be a minion, but things like charms the victim can only make basic attacks, dominate its dazed and only at will attacks, and though I can no longer find it I believe I saw someplace that mentioned you could only make basic attacks with summons. So maybe I am not sure, but it seems to fit the other rules.

And while I can't be sure of it, it seems like a fairly quick and easy way to keep summons without losing any more economy of action than the 4e rules already do. Sure 3e had problems with summons, but that was more do to a long list of creatures with a varied list of abilities. a player who was not totally on the ball would take a long time to decdie what the summoned monsters were doing. Astral constructs rarely had this problem in me experience.

And a fireball fills 49 squares, having 12 of those squares occupied isn't a stretch, especially in something like a dungeon where you do not have a massive amount of space to spread out.

 

[Ahglock]

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.

Well 3e was not trying to make a claim to having an economy of actions balancing mechanic, so rolling 12 saves wasn't an issue. If you are claiming you want an economy of actions so each player has effectively one action, having the player roll 12 times for his area of effect powers kind of goes against it.

I personally dig making them minions as how it is done, since it removes keeping track of HP, and I'm a big Naruto fan so all the shadow clones poofing when hit fits really well.

OT: but Naruto brings up my biggest complaint with 4e, they went too far with the nerfing of cool abilities and not far enough with the buffing of the non-magic types. Epic does not feel even remotely epic enough to me, I want run on water action in the heroic tier and for this to be done by mundane classes, i want the epic to be well much more epic than it is. And I want people to be able to re-use abilities left and right if they want to. Basically I wanted D&D 4e to be able to run a Naruto game really easily, but instead it will require a lot of work. So I guess it isn't anime enough for me.

 

[Hussar]

Well 3e was not trying to make a claim to having an economy of actions balancing mechanic, so rolling 12 saves wasn't an issue. If you are claiming you want an economy of actions so each player has effectively one action, having the player roll 12 times for his area of effect powers kind of goes against it.

I personally dig making them minions as how it is done, since it removes keeping track of HP, and I'm a big Naruto fan so all the shadow clones poofing when hit fits really well.

OT: but Naruto brings up my biggest complaint with 4e, they went too far with the nerfing of cool abilities and not far enough with the buffing of the non-magic types. Epic does not feel even remotely epic enough to me, I want run on water action in the heroic tier and for this to be done by mundane classes, i want the epic to be well much more epic than it is. And I want people to be able to re-use abilities left and right if they want to. Basically I wanted D&D 4e to be able to run a Naruto game really easily, but instead it will require a lot of work. So I guess it isn't anime enough for me.

There is, of course, a massive difference.

With fireball, you are rolling 12 attacks once. With 4 summoned badgers, I'm rolling 12 attacks EVERY round. Plus, I have to roll damage, move, and track hit points for four badgers in addition to my own turn.

There really is no comparison here. At best a fireball (encounter power) is going to catch a dozen enemies once in a very long while. Meaning that once in a very long while, my wizard's turn is going to be a bit longer than your fighter's turn. Not massively longer, since I'm just rolling 12 attacks. One damage roll. And only once per fight.

For fireball to step on economy of actions toes, it would have to be every round, have hit points, be buffable, able to do Opportunity Attacks etc. etc.

Not even close.

 

[Ahglock]

There is, of course, a massive difference.

With fireball, you are rolling 12 attacks once. With 4 summoned badgers, I'm rolling 12 attacks EVERY round. Plus, I have to roll damage, move, and track hit points for four badgers in addition to my own turn.

There really is no comparison here. At best a fireball (encounter power) is going to catch a dozen enemies once in a very long while. Meaning that once in a very long while, my wizard's turn is going to be a bit longer than your fighter's turn. Not massively longer, since I'm just rolling 12 attacks. One damage roll. And only once per fight.

For fireball to step on economy of actions toes, it would have to be every round, have hit points, be buffable, able to do Opportunity Attacks etc. etc.

Not even close.

Well since the wizard in particular and lots of other classes have tons of area of effect attacks, you very likely will be making multiple attacks virtually every round of the fight. So, no it isn't very different. On top of that, lots of the wizard attacks have lingering effects, which while they do not have attack rolls do have damage rolls that pop up on the targets turn.

 

[Falling Icicle]

This is more appropriate for the house rules forum, but I thought I'd post my idea about how Animate Dead could work as a spell. I wanted to make something roughly comparable to Bigby's Icy Hand, but different. The skeleton doesn't need to be sustained, but it still requires the Wizard to spend a minor action to direct it. It also does less damage than Bigby's Icy Hand and can be attacked and destroyed.

Animate Dead
Wizard Attack 5
You strike the ground with a wave of black lightning and a skeleton warrior crawls from the ground to serve you.
Daily * Arcane, Conjuration, Implement
Standard Action
Ranged 20
Effect: You conjure a medium-size humanoid skeleton warrior in an unoccupied square within range, and it attacks an adjacent foe. The skeleton can help an ally flank. It lasts until the end of the encounter, for 5 minutes or until destroyed. The skeleton has a number of hit points equal to your Blooded hit point value, Speed 6, an AC and other defenses equal to 10 + your Intelligence bonus + 1/2 your level and resist necrotic 10. Directing the skeleton to move and/or attack or take some other action is a minor action for you. It can attack only once per turn. As a mindless creation, it takes no actions unless you spend a minor action to direct it. You can also direct a skeleton to take other appropriate actions, such as opening a door, picking up an item, and other such basic tasks. Assume it has a Strength score equal to your Intelligence score for determining how much it can lift, move or carry.
Target: One creature next to the skeleton
Attack: Intelligence + 3 vs. AC.
Hit: 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage.

 

[VannATLC]

That's ok. I don't mind making its attack a minor, as you'll need to expend 2 minors to make it move and attack, anyway. (excluding a charge, I guess.)

I'd rule no resistance to necrotive and that necrotic damage grants it temporary HP, but a vulnerability to Radiant.

I'd also require that it needs a corpse.

While I think its an admirable effort, I think its unlikely to please the people with the biggest issues.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

This is more appropriate for the house rules forum, but I thought I'd post my idea about how Animate Dead could work as a spell. I wanted to make something roughly comparable to Bigby's Icy Hand, but different. The skeleton doesn't need to be sustained, but it still requires the Wizard to spend a minor action to direct it. It also does less damage than Bigby's Icy Hand and can be attacked and destroyed.

Animate Dead
Wizard Attack 5
You strike the ground with a wave of black lightning and a skeleton warrior crawls from the ground to serve you.
Daily * Arcane, Conjuration, Implement
Standard Action
Ranged 20
Effect: You conjure a medium-size humanoid skeleton warrior in an unoccupied square within range, and it attacks an adjacent foe. The skeleton can help an ally flank. It lasts until the end of the encounter, for 5 minutes or until destroyed. The skeleton has a number of hit points equal to your Blooded hit point value, Speed 6, an AC and other defenses equal to 10 + your Intelligence bonus + 1/2 your level and resist necrotic 10. Directing the skeleton to move and/or attack or take some other action is a minor action for you. It can attack only once per turn. As a mindless creation, it takes no actions unless you spend a minor action to direct it. You can also direct a skeleton to take other appropriate actions, such as opening a door, picking up an item, and other such basic tasks. Assume it has a Strength score equal to your Intelligence score for determining how much it can lift, move or carry.
Target: One creature next to the skeleton
Attack: Intelligence + 3 vs. AC.
Hit: 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage.

I think this is a good compromise, but I agree with the previous poster that the die-hards will not be satisfied...

 

[Hussar]

Well since the wizard in particular and lots of other classes have tons of area of effect attacks, you very likely will be making multiple attacks virtually every round of the fight. So, no it isn't very different. On top of that, lots of the wizard attacks have lingering effects, which while they do not have attack rolls do have damage rolls that pop up on the targets turn.

Hrm, let's compare.

The wizard, at best (or worst, depending on point of view) (and also not just the wizard since other classes also have AoE abilities) is making several attacks per round. 1/enemy.

The summoner is taking his turn, plus an entire turn for each and every creature he summons. That's an opportunity attack, movement, minor, move and standard (bloody hell I cannot remember the names of the actions) for EACH summoned creature. Plus, it is quite possible that a summoned creature may have an area attack, necessitating 1 roll/enemy once again for EACH summoned creature.

Never mind that you now have a single player at the table taking five turns for every one that the other players take. Yeah, that compares to casting fireball.

 

[robertliguori]

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.

Yes. We are in agreement. Animating dead is evil. Evil can trivially turned towards harmlessness and be beneficial for all sentient life. Holy Word is good. Good can be trivially turned toward the callous murder of innocents. Ergo, the planar energies of good and evil do not necessarily correspond to actual moral action. It is certainly true that in most cases, Good magics lend themselves towards morally desired actions, and that Evil magics lend themselves towards morally undesired actions, but most cases is not sufficent to make blanket statements. Most people running around waving an axe wildly and shouting are evil; this does not invalidate the existence of CG barbarian PCs. Most necromancers call forth dark, unnatural things from formerly-human remains for purposes of conquest and slaughter; some call forth dark, unnatural things from animal corpses and use said things to further the cause of good.

Another example: Some laws are pretty much universally agreed to be good laws. (The illegality of theft and murder, for example.) Other laws are not so recognized, and exist as laws only because no one's bothered to strike them down. (Laws against selling alcohol on Sunday, just as an example.) In such a system, you can't claim "That woman is a lawbreaker!" and expect people to assume that the laws she has violated are the good ones; it does not necessarily follow that a willingness to break arbitrary laws implies a willingness to break the good ones. So, yes, in the D&D-verse, you get moral spells; you also get a lot of people looking at what an absolute, arbitrary morality actually implies about the universe, and marking off the various aligned planes as potential post-mortem retirement homes as such a consequence.

 

[Aria Silverhands]

Animating the dead is only evil if the society and civilization, aka culture, believes it to be evil.