The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 40
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2009

    Default How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    There is a myth circulating, that a wizard is an inferor necromancer to a cleric. While looking at the classes as is, this may be the case. However, people forget, wizards are not bound to just the spells on their list. Wizards can make spells. Where do you think the spell, Issac's Greater missile storm got it's name? Some wizard named Issac decided to make that spell. People don't ever consider this when saying that the wizard is inferior to the cleric for pure necromancy, yet it is this fact that can make the wizard at the least as good, if not better at necromancy then a cleric. Why? Because frankly, there are little rules on how the creation of spells by a wizard functions, at least from what I know. Thus, it is up to individual DMs and players to determine how this is done.

    Some DMs, may make this impossible for a low level wizard, however, when I first tried arcane necromancy, I was thankful to have a DM who made the process friendly to low level wizards as well as high ones. The process we used was I would think up of a concept for a spell, and the DM would then approve or disapprove it. If they approved it, then they would prescribe what needed to be done to create the spell, such as how many hours must be spent in practice of the new spell to prefect it, what I must learn before I can even practice it ect...

    Under this system, I had created the Spells Influence Undead and Lesser Animate Dead. Influence Undead was a level 1 spell which allowed the caster to rebuke undead as if he/she was an evil cleric of the same level as him/her. Lesser Animate Dead is just what it sounds like, a level 2 spell which acted as Animate Dead but with much stricter drawbacks, such as the undead requiring intense concentration to animate, control and command and once the spell ended the animated corpses would turn to dust and thus become useless.

    So, technically, if you have skill at making spells, and a friendly DM who is open and fair when it comes to spell creation, a wizard can be as good as, and perhaps even better(depending on how creative and skilled you are at making spells) at pure necromancy then a cleric.

    Opinions?
    Last edited by Giegue; 2010-01-12 at 09:03 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Colossus in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    Now, disagree all you want, but unless there are some spell creation rules I am not aware of, I believe that the Wizard can equal the cleric, and even surpass him/her at necromancy.
    And Bard can beat both by coming up with even more imaginative spells! Mise! Seriously though, any caster can come up with spells; that's hardly an argument for, or against their potency on any given field. Cleric is a worse teleporter than Wizard...unless you come up with a couple of low-level Teleports Wizards don't have access to!
    Campaign Journal: Uncovering the Lost World - A Player's Diary in Low-Magic D&D (Latest Update: 8.3.2014)
    Being Bane: A Guide to Barbarians Cracking Small Men - Ever Been Angry?! Then this is for you!
    SRD Averages - An aggregation of all the key stats of all the monster entries on SRD arranged by CR.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Well, once you get into homebrewing anything can be more powerful than anything. And that's exactly when spell creation is - homebrew.

    We say clerics are better than wizards because we have to have some base, some reference point, on which to base discussions. This means we are forced to stick to RAW when discussing... well, pretty much anything.

    Basically, all we can say in response to this is 'good for you.' Because without the reference point of sticking to RAW, we can't say *anything* worthwhile.
    Proudly without a signature for 5 years. Wait... crap.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    If your DM is going to fiat things to make your concept, you're moving down the slippery slope towards freeform (yay, freeform!)

    And I believe we shall disagree all we want.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mushroom Ninja's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    While it is true that Wizards can create new spells, there are no exact rules for doing so and it is, therefore, highly dependent on the DM. Depending on the DM, you may or may not be able to work something out. It is for this reason that in discussion, the cleric is generally considered the superior necromancer -- it can outnecromancer the wizard without having to rely on homebrew.

    EDIT: The ninja... they're everywhere!!!!
    Last edited by Mushroom Ninja; 2010-01-12 at 09:05 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Signmaker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    You know Bosco?!

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Oof, the homebrew card.

    While technically a valid point, this is sort of equivalent to the statement "By adding water to paper, it becomes wet". Yes, it's usually true, but you don't show very much through the practice.

    In homebrewDnD, yes your point can be valid/invalid. It's more constructive to others if you jive in OutOfTheBoxDnD, though.
    Last edited by Signmaker; 2010-01-12 at 09:07 PM.
    "So Marbles, why do they call you Marbles?"

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Vizzerdrix's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    There is a myth circulating, that a wizard is an inferor necromancer to a cleric. Opinions?
    This is the first time I have ever heard this myth, so my opinion is thus: Poppycock and Bolderdash!
    ,,,,^..^,,,,


    Quote Originally Posted by Haldir View Post
    Edit- I understand it now, Fighters are like a status symbol. If you're well off enough to own a living Fighter, you must be pretty well off!

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    I can understand from argument of base vs. base. However, I am not basing this on base. On base, a cleric is better then a wizard and a dread necromancer beats them both. What I am just trying to point out is the fact that spell creation can be used to make a wizard as good as a cleric at necromancy, depending on the DM. I even stated that fact that in terms of base, the cleric is better.

    However, this really came from a misunderstanding, since I did not realize that arguments of wizards sucking at necromancy beyond debuffing was strictly in terms of base vs. base and not the full potential of one class vs. the full potential of another. Also, as far as I am aware, bards, sorcerers and other spontaneous casters can't make spells since they kinda just all of the sudden "know" there spells rather then learn them. Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    Last edited by Giegue; 2010-01-12 at 09:14 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mushroom Ninja's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vizzerdrix View Post
    This is the first time I have ever heard this myth, so my opinion is thus: Poppycock and Bolderdash!
    A wise man once said these words:
    Quote Originally Posted by K's Revised Necromancer Handbook
    At its core, the Cleric is a better class than the Wizard. It gets better armor and weapon proficiencies, better saves, more spells per day, more hit points, the ability to ignore ASF, free knowledge of the entire spell-list, and a better BAB. That's not to say that any particular Wizard is outdone by any particular Cleric, there are some very powerful spells on the Wizard list that are not on the Cleric list. But if a Wizard finds himself casting a spell that's on the Cleric list, at least for that round he's the big sucker."
    This is very, very true when it comes to animate dead -- Wizards don't even get it till lv 7.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    And their god can decide to be nice to them. It's certainly not unprecedented. But, like your example of spell research, it rarely happens enough to influence the populace at large IME.

    PS: Sorcerers:
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    A sorcerer casts arcane spells which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list
    These spells are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list. Ergo, some spells (the non-primarily-drawn ones) may be from other lists. Like the "extra-special-necromancer" list.
    Last edited by Foryn Gilnith; 2010-01-12 at 09:16 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Signmaker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    You know Bosco?!

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    Also, as far as I am aware, bards, sorcerers and other spontaneous casters can't make spells since they kinda just all of the sudden "know" there spells rather then learn them. Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    The Magic section of the PHB might help your pursuits, in this case.
    "So Marbles, why do they call you Marbles?"

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Titan in the Playground
     
    ShneekeyTheLost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    I wish I knew...
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldariel View Post
    And Bard can beat both by coming up with even more imaginative spells! Mise! Seriously though, any caster can come up with spells; that's hardly an argument for, or against their potency on any given field. Cleric is a worse teleporter than Wizard...unless you come up with a couple of low-level Teleports Wizards don't have access to!
    Travel domain gets access to Dimension door, Teleport, Greater Teleport, and Teleportation Circle.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Underlord View Post
    All hail great Shneekeythulhu! Ia Ia Shneeky fthagn
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quite possibly, the best rebuttal I have ever witnessed.
    Joker Bard - the DM's solution to the Batman Wizard.
    Takahashi no Onisan - The scariest Samurai alive
    Incarnum and YOU: a reference guide
    Soulmelds, by class and slot: Another Incarnum reference
    Multiclassing for Newbies: A reference guide for the rest of us

    My homebrew world in progress: Falcora

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mushroom Ninja's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    Basically, this depends on DM ruling as much as arcane spell creation does. If your DM is cool with it, it works well. If not, then you haven't a chance.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Olentu sang the song!

    Clerics can as I recall also make make custom spells.
    Last edited by olentu; 2010-01-12 at 09:25 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Colossus in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShneekeyTheLost View Post
    Travel domain gets access to Dimension door, Teleport, Greater Teleport, and Teleportation Circle.
    Still not as good without Spontaneous Domain Casting. Talking about generic Cleric here tho, not a teleport specialist (I mean, the Wiz isn't assumed to be optimized for Teleportation either).
    Campaign Journal: Uncovering the Lost World - A Player's Diary in Low-Magic D&D (Latest Update: 8.3.2014)
    Being Bane: A Guide to Barbarians Cracking Small Men - Ever Been Angry?! Then this is for you!
    SRD Averages - An aggregation of all the key stats of all the monster entries on SRD arranged by CR.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Titan in the Playground
     
    ShneekeyTheLost's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    I wish I knew...
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Within the rules, not getting into Spell Creation, it is easier for a Cleric to get access to specific Wizard spells via Domains than it is for Wizards to get access to specific Cleric spells.

    Arcane disciple (Death domain) might do it, though. You probably won't be needing to cast it more than once a day... I hope
    Quote Originally Posted by The Underlord View Post
    All hail great Shneekeythulhu! Ia Ia Shneeky fthagn
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quite possibly, the best rebuttal I have ever witnessed.
    Joker Bard - the DM's solution to the Batman Wizard.
    Takahashi no Onisan - The scariest Samurai alive
    Incarnum and YOU: a reference guide
    Soulmelds, by class and slot: Another Incarnum reference
    Multiclassing for Newbies: A reference guide for the rest of us

    My homebrew world in progress: Falcora

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Titan in the Playground
     
    tyckspoon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    'kay. You're wrong. Divine casters can do research in exactly the same way as Wizards, and spontaneous casters can choose "...spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they have gained some understanding of." Which is to say, they can research or study a spell and then pick it as a spell known. The fluff for all of the methods will be different, but mechanically it all comes down to "You may learn or invent a spell that is not on the standard list. Ask your DM how he wants to handle that."

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Canada, eh?
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    I can understand from argument of base vs. base. However, I am not basing this on base. On base, a cleric is better then a wizard and a dread necromancer beats them both. What I am just trying to point out is the fact that spell creation can be used to make a wizard as good as a cleric at necromancy, depending on the DM. I even stated that fact that in terms of base, the cleric is better.

    However, this really came from a misunderstanding, since I did not realize that arguments of wizards sucking at necromancy beyond debuffing was strictly in terms of base vs. base and not the full potential of one class vs. the full potential of another. Also, as far as I am aware, bards, sorcerers and other spontaneous casters can't make spells since they kinda just all of the sudden "know" there spells rather then learn them. Also, I am guessing a cleric could never make spells either unless their god decides to be nice to them. However, if I am wrong on this, let me know.
    Why not extend this to the rest of the game? If a class's 'full potential' includes custom spells, then there are a number of other myths that this disproves. "Clerics are better at turning undead," "Bards are better at social engineering," "Rogue are better at finding traps," "Barbarians are better at getting mad and hitting stuff with axes," "Commoners are better at basket weaving."

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Jack_Simth's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2006

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vizzerdrix View Post
    This is the first time I have ever heard this myth, so my opinion is thus: Poppycock and Bolderdash!
    Pretty much.

    The Cleric-X can keep a fixed number of undead under his command (based strictly on his caster level and his rebuke level - essentially 5* Cleric level, if you ignore boosters).

    The Wizard, on the other hand, gets the second level spell "Command Undead" (which the cleric doesn't get). The range is such that it qualifies for Chain spell. Which, you know, means that if a Wizard-X has a very large number of mindless undead nearby ... they're his for caster level days. Or until, you know, he wears them out. As a bonus? As it's a spell with a duration, it technically trumps the Cleric's Instant control of Rebuking undead.

    So while the Cleric has to choose to lose control of some of his undead if he wants to control more, the Wizard just devotes another spell slot to his control mechanisms.
    Last edited by Jack_Simth; 2010-01-12 at 09:35 PM.
    Of course, by the time I finish this post, it will already be obsolete. C'est la vie.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Others have already adequately answered why the ability to make spells up isn't a useful rejoinder to the claim. So I'd like to instead argue that wizards get enough good necromancy so that they can be quite effective necromancers and even do some stuff that clerics can't do very well. The key issue is that while clerics are better at creating undead than wizards, that's not all necromancy is about. If one considers draining the life of one's foes, controlling undead, and other traditional aspects of necromancy wizards have many options that clerics lack. To make the point I'll just list some of the necromancy spells in core that wizards get that clerics don't:

    Chill Touch,Ray of Enfeeblement, False Life, Command Undead, Ghoul Touch, Spectral Hand, Halt Undead, Ray of Exhaustion, Vampiric Touch, Enervation, Magic Jar, Control Undead, Finger of Death, Clone, Wail of the Banshee

    The necromancy of a wizard is much more flexible and far reaching than that of a cleric. As long as you aren't hung up on making the biggest, baddest undead you can, a wizard can do about as well with necromancy as a cleric if one is just looking at core. The situation gets more complicated outside of core. But the notion that wizards are intrinsically worse off than clerics at necromancy simply isn't accurate. This argument doesn't require any DM fiat or the like, simply the fact that wizards have access to some very nice spells.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Titan in the Playground
     
    tyckspoon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshuaZ View Post
    The necromancy of a wizard is much more flexible and far reaching than that of a cleric. As long as you aren't hung up on making the biggest, baddest undead you can, a wizard can do about as well with necromancy as a cleric if one is just looking at core. The situation gets more complicated outside of core. But the notion that wizards are intrinsically worse off than clerics at necromancy simply isn't accurate. This argument doesn't require any DM fiat or the like, simply the fact that wizards have access to some very nice spells.
    The claim, accurately, is that Clerics are better commanders of undead than Wizards. This is generally true, by way of Rebuke Undead and various options that boost Animate Dead/Create Undead for a Cleric that a Wizard cannot easily replicate. It says nothing about the Wizard's ability to portray an Ominous Dark Wizard, which is an area the Wizard is clearly and unsurprisingly better at. But that's mostly irrelevant, as the topic at hand is (was) about raising and controlling the undead.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Mushroom Ninja's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by tyckspoon View Post
    It says nothing about the Wizard's ability to portray an Ominous Dark Wizard, which is an area the Wizard is clearly and unsurprisingly better at. But that's mostly irrelevant, as the topic at hand is (was) about raising and controlling the undead.
    Clerics can wear dark robes and wide-brimmed hats too...

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by tyckspoon View Post
    The claim, accurately, is that Clerics are better commanders of undead than Wizards. This is generally true, by way of Rebuke Undead and various options that boost Animate Dead/Create Undead for a Cleric that a Wizard cannot easily replicate. It says nothing about the Wizard's ability to portray an Ominous Dark Wizard, which is an area the Wizard is clearly and unsurprisingly better at. But that's mostly irrelevant, as the topic at hand is (was) about raising and controlling the undead.
    The wording used was "necromancer". Necromancy isn't just about raising and controlling the dead. Necromancy is about a lot more than just raising the dead.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Force's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    The argument used by the OP makes me think of this:

    Let's say we have two car models, A and B. A-model is faster than B-model. Let's say that you own a B. You make performance mods to your B that make it faster than an A-model. Based on this, you now claim that B-models are faster than A-models, as a general rule.

    The thread title is misleading. This is RAW, not homebrew. Yes, your wizard with homebrew spells can be as good at necromancy as a cleric... because you made changes to the wizard and did nothing for the cleric.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Force View Post
    This is RAW, not homebrew.
    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    I did not realize that arguments of wizards sucking at necromancy beyond debuffing was strictly in terms of base vs. base
    Naw, it's homebrew.
    Interestingly, as there is no creation directly involved, it's probably more suited to be in this forum.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    OP, are you serious? that a wizard is as good a necromancer as a cleric because your DM can use fiat to make up new spells that don't exist in any published source? by that argument the best ultimate necromancer is the fighter, because you can via DM fiat decide that fighters get to command undead, heal undead, and raise undead. And you know what? the best healers are all wizards, because wizards can research spells that heal better than clerics can... btw, research rules allow both wizards AND clerics to research spells equally...

    Advantages clerics have over wizards when it come to raising the dead:
    1. Most undead creation spells are limited to divine casting.
    2. Inflict wounds (in all its permutations) heals undead, can be spontanously converted.
    3. A cleric has a built in ability to control undead (up to a cumulative HD equal to his own; with each individual undead being half his HD at most)
    4. Due to the limit of HD of controlled undead, having a large undead army means most are uncontrolled (in DnD, uncontrolled undead follow the last command given to them, they are NOT like zombies in movies... but more like an automaton). A cleric can use rebuke/turn to keep away an enemy's undead and to steal control over undeads that belong to an enemy.
    5. Clerics have spells that are not available to wizards that deal with undead (detect them, destroy them, control them, and make it impossible for undead to attack them).
    6. there was another benefit that I had in mind but I forgot while listing the rest...
    EDIT: I remember now, the 6th thing was the ability to bolster undead (confer turn resistance)

    Those things are all advantages of a cleric over a wizard; the wizard has not one single ability that that works with undead that is not also available to the cleric.
    Last edited by taltamir; 2010-01-12 at 11:29 PM.
    I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

    the glass is always 100% full. Approximately 50% of its volume is full of dihydrogen monoxide and some dissolved solutes, and approx 50% a mixture of gasses known as "air" which contains roughly (by volume) 78.08% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.038% carbon dioxide, and trace amounts of other gases.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Titan in the Playground
     
    tyckspoon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshuaZ View Post
    The wording used was "necromancer". Necromancy isn't just about raising and controlling the dead. Necromancy is about a lot more than just raising the dead.
    Ok? Point conceded? And yet, the thread was started about undead, and when most people say "I want to be a necromancer" they're talking about undead (generally, if they're talking about a wizard-who-uses-necromancy spells they will refer to a Specialist Necromancer instead, in the same vein as specialist Conjurers, Evokers, etc.) The common usage of necromancy is about undead. So.. go you, you made a valid semantic point.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by taltamir View Post
    OP, thats the best you can come up with? seriously? that a wizard is as good a necromancer as a cleric because your DM can use fiat to make up new spells that don't exist in any published source?
    The argument was that wizards were good necromancers because the relevant rules text easily enabled DM fiat (custom research), whereas there is no clear rules support for the DM turning fighters (specifically) into necromancers. This has since been debunked, as all other casters have the same easy-enabled DM fiat (custom research).

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    you can hardly call it "research rules", it just says you have to take 1 week per spell level and that the DM decide any costs, failure rates, and what the spell actually does "as appropriate"
    its less rules and more like flavor text
    Last edited by taltamir; 2010-01-12 at 10:26 PM.
    I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

    the glass is always 100% full. Approximately 50% of its volume is full of dihydrogen monoxide and some dissolved solutes, and approx 50% a mixture of gasses known as "air" which contains roughly (by volume) 78.08% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.038% carbon dioxide, and trace amounts of other gases.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: How a wizard can be just as good at pure necromancy as a cleric.

    If people call the magic item creation guidelines in the back of the DMG "rules", people can call flavor text "rules". You'd have to ask the OP this, though; I just summarized what I thought his point was.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •