Good-aligned Necromancer?

[5w337x7007h]

Now I saw this idea on Imgur about a guy who played a necromancer that used the undead for good, so here's the post. http://i.imgur.com/2VL2yqd.png

I've been pondering this belief for a while, that not all necromancers are inherently evil. That there are Necromancers that seek to create a semblance of balance in the world, keeping the evil at bay with the dead who would happily, in life, do this without question anyways.

Any ideas where I should start? I'm thinking a Heretic of the Clergy of Pharasma might be a good starting point.

[OldTrees1]

Let's see. I have done this 3 ways.

1) Bodies are property of the soul. The soul can do with them what it wishes even including granting it to a necromancer. (Basically: "undead via permission")

2) Energy is neutral. How you use them matters. (Ended up trying to create a post racism/typism/sexism/... and post scarcity society in the wastelands)

3) [Technically I played this as Blue/Orange morality but it could be Good] Death is not evil. The Goddess of Death deserves just as much reverence has her sister the Lady of Life. Undeath is one of her tools to balance the out flow of souls.

[5w337x7007h]

Could I technically follow this path as an Alchemist, if at all possible? Edit: Nevermind, figured out that the undead a Reanimator creates are uncontrolled.

[Doc_Maynot]

I'm currently playing a CG Necromancer. I'm however using Necromancer (Undead Focused) Wizard 1/Sage Blooded Arcanist 19 (in order to just use Int). I picked up the School Understanding Arcane Exploit with a feat allowing me to have my Arcanist and Wizard levels stack for the powers of my wizard school.
I also use Sacred Geometry to help me extend Command Undead so that I can just use that power for the uninteligent undead.

The character believes that she is just animating the bodies (seeing as I primarily deal with unintelligent undead) with a false soul. She still treats the undead like friends or pets depending on the creature she animated. And so far even the Paladin has had no complaints about it seeing as she's been keeping him in the loop with her undead. He even is encouraging it to help the kingdom out. (We are playing Kingmaker)

[atemu1234]

I've seen tragic-type necromancers. Usually with a dead loved one in the background, who they brought back as zombies or somesuch.

[Edenbeast]

I think the White Necromancer is probably what you are looking for. You mentioned Pharasma, so I assumed you play Pathfinder.

[Psyren]

I think the White Necromancer is probably what you are looking for. You mentioned Pharasma, so I assumed you play Pathfinder.

Keep in mind this is a third party class. In general, neutral necromancy (never mind good) is difficult to pull off in Pathfinder (or 3.5 for that matter) without houserules.

You have an okay concept but it's your GM you need to sell on it.

[Vhaidara]

I personally allow it, but usually the difference between Good and Neutral is that Good gets the permission of the soul first (Speak with Dead is usually given as an at-will SLA for such characters)

[lytokk]

Not to steal the thread, but I'm working on something like this right now, and could use some feedback. I don't see why there's any reason necromancy couldn't be used for good. So long as the undead are volunteers. Speaking with the dead could easily offer closure to grieving relatives, stuff like that.

[thematgreen]

I don't know if this helps, but:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...you-allow-this

[5w337x7007h]

To add to my knowledge of history, I remember a classic necromancer from the Diablo books, Zayl. His entire family and culture revolve around the belief that necromancy is a neutral magic that is only as evil as it's user. Their order is dedicated to preserving the balance of good and evil, only acting when evil becomes to prevalent in the world.

His expertise in necromancy is amazing. You can find him as a protagonist in Kingdom of Shadows and Moon of the Spider.

[Bucky]

I personally allow it, but usually the difference between Good and Neutral is that Good gets the permission of the soul first (Speak with Dead is usually given as an at-will SLA for such characters)

Pre-death permission should be good enough, and is much easier to obtain.

I recall one homebrew setting with an order of paladins, many of whom would elect to continue serving after death. Which meant the order needed a few good-aligned necromancers to allow them to do so.

[Vhaidara]

Pre-death permission should be good enough, and is much easier to obtain.

Yes, but not always an option.

[Temotei]

If you're into homebrew, Krimm's white necromancer might work for you.

[Toilet Cobra]

This actually came up in our group back in third when we had a Dread Necromancer and a pally being rolled up in the same group. Both the players and the DM (me) wanted to avoid conflict while keeping the RP solid. So we fluffed the DN to be a little more benevolent by adding the idea that using someone's body or soul to create an undead allowed them to redeem themselves for a life of sin. Basically, if you were a bandit and you died, you might be damned, but you could 'work off' some of that punishment by fighting as a zombie against evil monsters. That particular necromancer was only neutral, but it would have worked basically the same if he'd been LG.

[Naanomi]

A cultural approach is a good one to take. One of the big nations in my home campaign has everyone turning into an Undead after death as part of their Caste system... some continue their labors as Zombies or Skeletons; others are made into intelligent undead to continue their studies or advise living rulers with their wisdom. Even incorporeal undead, though not intentionally created, are utilized and guided when found. Only vampires (for historic reasons) and Ghouls (for the damage they can do to 'sacred corpses') are really reviled.

While the society itself is Lawful Neutral with some secretly Lawful Evil types in the upper politics; there is (and has been) room for Good necromancers trained by the death-cult.

[Coidzor]

Now I saw this idea on Imgur about a guy who played a necromancer that used the undead for good, so here's the post. http://i.imgur.com/2VL2yqd.png

I've been pondering this belief for a while, that not all necromancers are inherently evil. That there are Necromancers that seek to create a semblance of balance in the world, keeping the evil at bay with the dead who would happily, in life, do this without question anyways.

Any ideas where I should start? I'm thinking a Heretic of the Clergy of Pharasma might be a good starting point.

Where to start? Probing your DM to see where they stand on things and if they agree with the Paizo devs that it should always be EVIL, EVIL, EVILL-E or if they can entertain the notion long enough to not just do it to screw you as part of a surprise reveal halfway through the game.

Following that, it sounds like you've either read the 3.5 homebrew PrC Redeemer of Regrets floating around these boards or you'd be interested in reading it for yourself. Formatting's a bit painful to read, but I believe all of the pertinent information is the the text rather than the table anyway. Well, ok, maybe some of the chassis information is still in the broken table, but that should be the easisest part to parse even if it takes a few minutes.

[JusticeZero]

Alignment has no effect whatsoever on your behavior, so why does the question matter? Seriously, before continuing, it needs to be made clear exactly why a do-gooder should CARE if they have an E on their sheet. It isn't stopping them from doing good after all.

[grarrrg]

To add to my knowledge of history, I remember a classic necromancer from the Diablo books, Zayl. His entire family and culture revolve around the belief that necromancy is a neutral magic that is only as evil as it's user. Their order is dedicated to preserving the balance of good and evil, only acting when evil becomes to prevalent in the world.

His expertise in necromancy is amazing. You can find him as a protagonist in Kingdom of Shadows and Moon of the Spider.

Diablo Necromancy /= DnD Necromancy.

Spoiler: info dump possible Diablo SPOILERS lurk within

Show

Diablo necromancers are very much Neutral. And they worship some spirit/bone dragon/god/thing.
They are about preserving "the balance", which is NOT the same as "the balance between good and evil".
There are (at least) 3 "worlds" in the Diablo universe, the "angel" one, the "demon" one, and the "human" one. The angels are locked in an eternal war with the demons. The human world was founded by angels and demons that no longer wanted any part of the fight, and humans are their "offspring".
The demons are (obviously) evil, but the angels aren't so much "good" as they are VERY overly Lawful. Both want to control the human world as it would give their side an advantage in their war.
The bone dragon guy founded the necromancers to keep either side from gaining much of a foothold in the human world. So they would fight the angels just as much as they would fight demons, except for the fact that the angels don't have as much of an obvious presence/influence going on.

[P.F.]

Alignment has no effect whatsoever on your behavior, so why does the question matter? Seriously, before continuing, it needs to be made clear exactly why a do-gooder should CARE if they have an E on their sheet. It isn't stopping them from doing good after all.

It's all fun and games until the mob with torches and pitchforks and good-aligned clerics and wizards decides to hunt you down.

[atemu1234]

It's all fun and games until the mob with torches and pitchforks and good-aligned clerics and wizards decides to hunt you down.

Meh, just another Friday for me.
...
...
...
No one told me that hobo had a family!

[Coidzor]

Alignment has no effect whatsoever on your behavior, so why does the question matter? Seriously, before continuing, it needs to be made clear exactly why a do-gooder should CARE if they have an E on their sheet. It isn't stopping them from doing good after all.

If the DM isn't willing to play ball with the player on a non-Evil Necromancer, do you really think they're not going to give them penalties for not roleplaying their Evil alignment properly? Or that they won't NPCify the character or ban it because they're one of those DMs that bans Evil PCs?

I mean, sure, OK, they might not, but then, they're also fairly likely to fall into that camp if they're that married to the idea that Necromancy must always be Evil. I'd say they're more likely to fall into that camp than to not fall into that camp, just going by whether or not they'd work with a player for non-Evil Necromancy.

[P.F.]

If the DM isn't willing to play ball with the player on a non-Evil Necromancer, do you really think they're not going to give them penalties for not roleplaying their Evil alignment properly?

What if we imagine a character who goes around kicking puppies. Does it several times a day. Keeps puppies for the purpose of kicking them, even. Has Neutral Evil or somesuch written on his character sheet.

Other than that he's a really nice guy. Polite, friendly, will go out of his way to help you. Hates the idea of innocent people being killed or oppressed. Slays demons. Thinks of himself as a good person, while he's kicking a puppy. Doesn't see why kicking puppies is wrong, believes it's making the world a better place, even. Sure, everyone thinks he's evil, but he's doing it anyway.

What DM in the world would argue that he isn't playing his alignment properly?

It's only when the puppy-kicking "good-guy" wants to put "Good" down as his alignment and be treated as if he were good that I take exception.

[Coidzor]

What if we imagine a character who goes around kicking puppies. Does it several times a day. Keeps puppies for the purpose of kicking them, even. Has Neutral Evil or somesuch written on his character sheet.

Other than that he's a really nice guy. Polite, friendly, will go out of his way to help you. Hates the idea of innocent people being killed or oppressed. Slays demons. Thinks of himself as a good person, while he's kicking a puppy. Doesn't see why kicking puppies is wrong, believes it's making the world a better place, even. Sure, everyone thinks he's evil, but he's doing it anyway.

Ok, so the character is deluded and thinks they're good when really they're evil. That's not going to satisfy the desire of a player who wants to play a legitimately good necromancer and is only marginally better than one of the several "**** yous" that a DM could pull with a player by pretending to go along with the player's desire only to screw them later, mostly because someone who wasn't actually married to the good necromancer so much as one that could actually be played with the rest of the party might actually be able to do something with that setup... so long as no Paladins or Clerics of hardass Good deities were involved, anyway.

What DM in the world would argue that he isn't playing his alignment properly?

I've run into several on this forum and several people who have had DMs who would complain or ban the character because they don't want to deal with insane or deluded PCs.

It's only when the puppy-kicking "good-guy" wants to put "Good" down as his alignment and be treated as if he were good that I take exception.

OK. The DM is ultimate arbiter of whether Necromancy is Evil in their game. I disagree with your position that it should always be Evil in all games if that is, in fact, your position, but I otherwise have no issue with you so long as you're actually upfront with your players about it.

[Mystral]

Undead are evil.

Creating evil creatures is an evil act.

Doing evil means to accomplish good is neutral at best.

You can occasionally do that and stay good, but not all the time.

Simple as that.

[5w337x7007h]

How does alignment work anyways? Is it the natural state of mind that detect spells are looking at, or is it their deity's point of view that they're looking through?

Imagine two people sitting at a table. One sees his/herself as a hero, committing acts of bravery and valor for the good of all, while the other sees a soldier who piously commits acts that would be perceived as severe criminal behavior.

Who is in the right? The first, or the second? Would a detect evil spell even work if that 'hero' believes, without a doubt, that what he's doing is good, or would it detect evil like the second believes it should?

[Mystral]

That really depends on the world you are playing in. Sometimes it's like karma, where you load up on "good" or "evil" karma according to your deeds. Sometimes it's more vague. Sometimes, good and evil are real forces in the world that battle each other and influence people, so that you change into an evil person when you cast evil spells too much.

[goto124]

A system where casting 'Evil' spells turns you 'Evil' isn't likely to work well for a well-meaning good necromancer, especially if she'll have to cast 'Evil' spells all the time.

It probably works best in games where alignment doesn't do much, or even exist at all.

Usually alignments are to guide (not enforce) roleplaying, and add to a few paladin/cleric spells I think?

[JusticeZero]

How does alignment work anyways? Is it the natural state of mind that detect spells are looking at, or is it their deity's point of view that they're looking through?

The way to prevent such spells from being useless is to assume that they are reporting the point of view of whatever or whoever is in charge of relegating souls to their relevant planes. The alignment planes are a thing. Everything is sorted into them. Something dictated the original sorting criteria, and that is what the spell will test.

Anyways, any GM who first moves the alignment of a character whose behavior is consistent, then tries to complain because the behavior didn't change when the descriptive alignment moved, isn't worth role-playing in front of in the first place. People play characters, not letters.

[Psyren]

The way to prevent such spells from being useless is to assume that they are reporting the point of view of whatever or whoever is in charge of relegating souls to their relevant planes. The alignment planes are a thing. Everything is sorted into them. Something dictated the original sorting criteria, and that is what the spell will test.

Anyways, any GM who first moves the alignment of a character whose behavior is consistent, then tries to complain because the behavior didn't change when the descriptive alignment moved, isn't worth role-playing in front of in the first place. People play characters, not letters.

An academic question then - what would that Good-behaving PC do if they were to later learn that (a) weaknesses/tears in the planar border were causing undead to run rampant and slaughter innocents in remote areas, and that (b) his necromantic activities were contributing to those tears? Would he keep doing it, or stop?