D&D 5E (2024) The Undead Army Necromancer is not Designable

[Leatherhead]

This thread illustrates the difficulties with this discussion.

On one hand we have people arguing for less minions and the other people advocating a "fix" that is a spell that creates a horde with one casting.

The biggest problem with this discussion is getting people to understand that "a horde" is a singular monster stat block that just looks like a bunch of individuals. We can have the cake and eat it too.

Really though, it shouldn't be a spell, it should be a subclass feature so as to hard limit access.

 

[Rushbolt]

I'd say not only is it designable, but it is designed. I would take a look at Mage Hand Press's Necromancer Class. The thralls have a combined CR cap, and collectively share one reaction and one bonus action. You can put them in a weird little bag of holding just for thralls. I think it's the closest anyone has gotten...

Necromancer | Base Class - Mage Hand Press

Command a horde of undead with the Necromancer base class for 5E 2024! Bend death to your will and rise to ultimate lichdom!

magehandpress.com

I haven't played this class yet, but all the features this class gets seem way to strong for the class to remain a full caster. Part of the redesign for a better balanced Necromancer class should be to divorce it from the Wizard class. This one does not do that so I feel the power level will just be off the charts.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The biggest problem with this discussion is getting people to understand that "a horde" is a singular monster stat block that just looks like a bunch of individuals. We can have the cake and eat it too.

Really though, it shouldn't be a spell, it should be a subclass feature so as to hard limit access.

Potentially the biggest problem is convincing people that reflavoring a statblock as "a horde" is an acceptable way to model the effect in a satisfying way.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Could say that the Animate Object spell as counts as necromancy when used on corpses. It gives 5-9 medium constructs for 1 minute in 5e2014 or 1-5 medium constructs in 5e2024. While playing a Bard, I have used it on corpses as they are objects.

It's not an army per se, but it is a decent mid-fight round of reinforcements for PCs.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I feel like the vibe of this thread is a lot of clever people who clearly hate necromancers coming up with high concept ways to disappoint would-be necromancers. You all should just ban them and the necromancy spells from your table if they're actually causing you so much trouble. Better than crafting some watered down "necromancer by and for people who don't actually want necromancers" option. Heck, since the necromancy spells create creatures which are evil aligned and set them free on the world if you fail to re-up control of them they are just about the only spells in the game which are just objectively evil. It's okay to say the heros just won't use that magic.

If I'm rolling up a necromancer it's because I want to roleplay the ascent into being some sort of lord of darkness (or lord of moral greyness), and as someone emulating some sort of BBEG, I want to play with some of the same toys the DM gets for a BBEG. I want to worry about the logistics of my undead goon squad and finding corpses for them, and I want to come up with creative and dynamic ways to deploy them.

My "solution" for the necromancer would be not to rejigger how undead minions work, but rather just to emphasize to players that this is an advanced option for people good at efficiently running statblocks in combat, it's not a particularly powerful option, but it involves taking on responisbility to be reasonable and not bog down the game, and most adventuring days that 3rd level spell slot would accomplish a lot more as a fireball than it would waking up a skeleton.

 

[Eubani]

I feel like the vibe of this thread is a lot of clever people who clearly hate necromancers coming up with high concept ways to disappoint would-be necromancers. You all should just ban them and the necromancy spells from your table if they're actually causing you so much trouble. Better than crafting some watered down "necromancer by and for people who don't actually want necromancers" option. Heck, since the necromancy spells create creatures which are evil aligned and set them free on the world if you fail to re-up control of them they are just about the only spells in the game which are just objectively evil. It's okay to say the heros just won't use that magic.

If I'm rolling up a necromancer it's because I want to roleplay the ascent into being some sort of lord of darkness (or lord of moral greyness), and as someone emulating some sort of BBEG, I want to play with some of the same toys the DM gets for a BBEG. I want to worry about the logistics of my undead goon squad and finding corpses for them, and I want to come up with creative and dynamic ways to deploy them.

My "solution" for the necromancer would be not to rejigger how undead minions work, but rather just to emphasize to players that this is an advanced option for people good at efficiently running statblocks in combat, it's not a particularly powerful option, but it involves taking on responisbility to be reasonable and not bog down the game, and most adventuring days that 3rd level spell slot would accomplish a lot more as a fireball than it would waking up a skeleton.

What we are saying is the goon squad you desire is problematic for the balance of the game and other players. We are seeking compromises for it not be a problem time, balance and spotlight wise.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What we are saying is the goon squad you desire is problematic

"Goon Squad" is a good description. And yes, that is what people want. Video game necromancers generally summon a range of different, specialised undead, not just a horde of generic skeletons. And that's very much part of the fun. And the OP is right: there is absolutely no way you can do that and make it fun in a turn based tabletop game when you have five other players waiting to take their turn. The best you can do is design something that is okay when there are only one or two players.

Making them all the same or treating them as a swarm, are tricks a DM can use to make the game flow quickly when there are a large number of entities in play. But they are not fun for players. It doesn't give them the experience they are looking for. In Diablo Clone Last Epoch my necromancer has around 12 summons (not including short duration wraiths), including six different kinds of specialised skeletons. In the Lich path in Pathfinder: Wraith of the Righteous you get to replace your NPC companions with undead companions, as well as customise a pet skeleton, choosing its class, advancement path and gear.

"Lets have a zone spell that does damage and fluff it as undead" simply does not cut it.

for the balance of the game and other players. We are seeking compromises for it not be a problem time, balance and spotlight wise.

Compromise is exactly what the WotC necromancer is. They even have a better compromise in the Reanimator, which, whilst limited to one pet, gives the all important customisation options.

Some things, you really can't do without a computer.

 

[tombowings]

Cool. I had a player who wanted to play a necromancer whose goal was to found a zombie civilization (for the good the all zombie men, women, and children). The civilization would, of course, be completely mindless, and individual zombies had no sense of self (stumbling around feasting on the flesh of whoever/whatever got too close), but the necromancer refused to believe it. He insisted they were real individuals.

How could the rules presented in this forum work to make this player's dream a reality?

Shouldn't this be a legit use of necromancy spells like animate dead and create undead?

 

[Minigiant]

I really could not disagree more. There are already far too many "do one thing with a clear intended purpose and nothing more" spells (and abilities, and whatever), and not enough "give you a weird tool to be applied creatively to a variety of situations" spells (etc.). Being able to be versatile and creative with whatever weird abilities you get is a lot of what makes these games worth going to all the trouble of actually playing with other humans, with all the scheduling, prep, and other effort that entails. I certainly don't need a bunch of overly-constrained-by-designer-intent video game magic in my tabletop rpgs.

It's less "do one thing with a clear intended purpose and nothing more"
More "separate the combat spells from the exploration spells and social spells."

If you want a spell that summons 10 zombies at level 3, sure. But they can't be combat zombies. If you want to push a boulder out the way, you have 10 guys to do it.

If you want a dozen bony warriors, sure. But they can't push the rock, search an area, and can't make grapples. It's Bone Sword and Bone Bow only. And they can't split up. You can make them guard a door but all of them must do it.

 

[Minigiant]

"Goon Squad" is a good description. And yes, that is what people want. Video game necromancers generally summon a range of different, specialised undead, not just a horde of generic skeletons. And that's very much part of the fun. And the OP is right: there is absolutely no way you can do that and make it fun in a turn based tabletop game when you have five other players waiting to take their turn. The best you can do is design something that is okay when there are only one or two players.

Making them all the same or treating them as a swarm, are tricks a DM can use to make the game flow quickly when there are a large number of entities in play. But they are not fun for players. It doesn't give them the experience they are looking for. In Diablo Clone Last Epoch my necromancer has around 12 summons (not including short duration wraiths), including six different kinds of specialised skeletons. In the Lich path in Pathfinder: Wraith of the Righteous you get to replace your NPC companions with undead companions, as well as customise a pet skeleton, choosing its class, advancement path and gear.

"Lets have a zone spell that does damage and fluff it as undead" simply does not cut it.

Compromise is exactly what the WotC necromancer is. They even have a better compromise in the Reanimator, which, whilst limited to one pet, gives the all important customisation options.

Some things, you really can't do without a computer.

"This can't be trusted for General Consumption"

Essentially, Necromancer fans want a broken class that they can promise to be fair and generous with but in the wild would and could easily be problematic.

Hence why no TTRPG designer gives them that.
A designer would have to make a compromise and Necro fans never ever ever say what they are willing to give up to get 90% of the rest.

The Necromancer Class is designable.