Players really want the Necromancer? (Forked: Non-published concepts you want)

[Rechan]

Specialty mages are just that: special. Their focus is much more than the standard player. Fewer people are going to play them.

It stands to reason if you have limited space, you're going to present the stuff that's going to appeal to the most people you can. THerefore, boomwizard is going to attract more than Illusionist wizard.

Or to put it another way: I felt that 3e core did specialty wizards horribly. They didn't feel like specialty wizards, they felt like a wizard who took the advanced class for a subject in Wizard College, while neglecting his grades in two other courses. Until the Warmage/Beguiler/Dread Necromancer, WotC didn't get the specialty mage right.

So yes, screw specialty mages in core. I want each one to get the love and attention they should upon creation, rather than a half-assed attempt like many claim the multi-classing is.

 

[Staffan]

I want specialists for all schools of magic- Divination, Abjuration, and yes, even Necromancy.

What schools? There's no such thing as schools of magic in 4e.

 

[roguerouge]

I don't play 4e, but isn't there a minion template or something that could be applied to hordes of skeletons and zombies?

 

[roguerouge]

I once came up with a setting where necromancy was the most common form of arcane magic (thanks to certain quirks in the landscape that were unexplained, even by me). Most civilised necromancers had their undead servants go masked or robed in public, to avoid upsetting the common citizenry.

Ah, so it was acknowledged as inflicting (emotional) harm on innocents.

 

[ST]

The Artificer playtest article, by the way, has a *lot* you could yoink for necromancy The Artifice keyword powers involve making little critters that you can move around the battlefield and have various effects.

It looks like you could cobble together a necro from things like this, the Illusionist at-will, Flaming Sphere, Spiritual Weapon, etc. You can't have dozens of pets attacking at once, but a few focused ones are doable.

So it looks like "the economy of actions" doesn't totally remove pet classes so much as it means they're being very careful with how they balance them.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What schools? There's no such thing as schools of magic in 4e.

I know- a bug, not a feature, IMHO.

 

[Barastrondo]

Ah, so it was acknowledged as inflicting (emotional) harm on innocents.

Sort of like not wearing pants.

 

[jdrakeh]

A NPC only ritual?

Something like that, yeah. I think you're just looking for reasons to get crabby at this point, though

 

[The Highway Man]

This assumes that the powers granted to the PC necromancer facilitate other definitions. They may only focus on a narrow potential, instead of the wide breadth many here can think of.

Or not. Indeed.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Ah, so it was acknowledged as inflicting (emotional) harm on innocents.

This has to be the funniest bizarre fixation on the messageboards at the moment. It's very Edena of Neith. Like, omg, adventurers upset a guy! That never happens and it's clearly evil if it does!