I want to make a good necromancer, but my DM says that all necromancy

>>51301325
Simple
Explain the benefits of industrial necromancy to him

Suck his dick

Realize that "Necromancy" is a broad and complex school of magic in D&D that is not fixated on the creation of undead (the invariably evil act in D&D). In actuality, a Necromancer wizard is mostly fixated on disabling foes, inflicting devastating effects and leeching life and power away from their opponents.

However, if you want to be an undead crafter, too bad. Fundamentally you can be Neutral at best. Using Evil means to Good ends is Neutral. Deal with it.

>>51301325
You can't. Especially if you have to ask other people.

You must offer absolution to the souls you confer and possess, and when their time in your employ is up, you must ward their grave or immolate their corpse such that their spirit can never be bothered by mortals again.

You must also only employ those souls who would agree to your propositions, and respect their terms. This could be troublesome at first, but by promising them that you would bless or guard their progeny you could 'buy' their employment.

You would also have to have great PR with everyone who is alive, because usually people who practice witchcraft of any sort are burned at the stake. Among the circles of magicians however, the art of necromancy is still abhorrent.

Good luck have fun

File: f38d47e695304f523fc899d7ddd30870.jpg (39KB, 564x666px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 564x666px

>>51301325
Do what the good necromancers of Sabriel do. They don't raise the dead, they lay them to rest. This might work in a campaign wherein the enemy is death, creatures of death, etc.

File: 1484665211151.jpg (103KB, 500x620px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 500x620px

> Muh good intentions
> Muh dark magic is just misunderstood
> Muh zombie workers
> Muh communist necromantic utopia
It sounds to me like you're a huge fucking heretic.

You ever notice how none of those "good necromancers" ever consider making golems instead? For some reason they want to dabble with dark powers and create ravenous, murderous animated corpses! Hm, I wonder why!

>>51301325
Tell Him Good and Evil is Subjective. And that History shall paint you whether or not you were good or evil

>>51301325
Focus on Repose rather than Death.

>>51301444
God I hope you Paladins are purge from this world.

>>51301444
Nice trips bro
Maybe because grapping a few old guy corpses and reanimating them is easier than spending a fucking year desing a golem that can't be mass produced

Why do you think the necrotic republic of karshinav survived so long?

Look, a Necromancer doesn't have to be evil but if the GM says Necromancy is evil than there's no way around it. Unless this is a preexisting setting where that isn't true and the GM is wrong than we cannot help you.

File: 1484053434830.png (361KB, 798x515px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 798x515px

>>51301325
Tell him Magic is a tool with no will of its own and to stop listing to those paladin propaganda

>>51301444
If we're talking about D&D, it'd be because golems are titanic siege weapons that cost a fortune to acquire the raw materials, phenomenal magic power to enchant, and large period of time to activate.
Depending on edition, they may also require a very rare and highly prized Manual of Golem Creation.

>>51301325
Your DM is the one who determines the setting, so if he says necromancy is evil in his world, it is.

>>51301446
>Good and Evil is Subjective
It never seems to be good people saying this.

>>51301566
Subjectively, it could be.

>>51301325
>#notallnecromancers
>#nolivesmatter

Fuck off with your undead apologist ass. We live-side here, nigga.

>>51301325
Even in a black-and-white morality system like Pathfinder, most necromancy spells aren't evil, only the ones that involve raising the dead. Most of the other necromancy spells are various flavors of energy drain.

I mean, couldn't you build a golem that collects stuff to build more golems?

Golems all the way down?

seems legit.

>>51301555
Golems in this context extends to any artificial servants.

Animating a skeleton carved from wood, rather than animating an actual skeleton.

File: 1475181988879.jpg (406KB, 700x964px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 700x964px

>>51301481
> Actually working to accomplish my goal is too hard, better start mass producing abominations out of human corpses and messing with immortal souls
> The fact that my magic is literally antithesis to life is not concerning me at all.
> Non-sentient undead starting to indiscriminately murder people the moment my head is turned is acceptable.
> Sentient undead being 99% evil is a (((pure coincidence))).
And you guys wonder why everybody hates you, and your school of magic is banned in every civilized kingdom. It's almost like you're a bunch of lazy, edgy, power hungry negligent assholes.

>>51301595
That's preferable to a corpse that creates more corpses.

>>51301325
Just tell him magic isnt good or bad

>>51301325
Look into Diablo (video game) necromancer. Their whole deal is about balance in nature with death, not about spreading it.

File: 1401543258063.png (344KB, 400x694px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 400x694px

>>51301325
Well, there's plenty that could be described as necromancy that is considered good; communing with ancestors or the dead in general, guiding spirits and repelling evil ones, even resurrection. In fact most of the source material for the vague category of "necromancy" was positive spiritual practices that have shifted over time and been degenerated to the modern specific image of "spoopy pale guy in black robes who controls skellingtons for super edgy evil".

Of course, it's up to your DM how they want things to go in their personal fictional world. They could remove necromancy entirely or rule that all magic is evil for violating the natural world.

>>51301325
>necromancer
Necromancer is a title, yes, but like the rest, the title is not who I am

>>51301601
That would be the art of Construct manufacturing in D&D.
In which case, the comparison's a little rougher and has greater differences depending on edition. But usually, Constructs are still yet more expensive than undead. Undead cost a corpse at lower levels and only marginally valuable gemstones at higher levels. Even lower-level Constructs generally start at several thousand GP for each model produced, to create a basic managerial construct that operates a field or builds a structure would start at 2100 GP.

File: TheCaretaker.png (796KB, 1912x4838px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 1912x4838px

>>51301325

How the fuck hasn't the Caretaker been posted?

>>51301325
Look up Hollowfaust city of necromancers
Its a interesting setting where this city was created by a counsel of necromancers, vampires, and liches.
In the city necromancy is common place. Instead of having slaves when someone dies there body is resurrected(unless the citizens family pays a tax ahead of time) and they're corpse does menial labor for the city, until they turn to dust.
While the powers at be are in no way "GOOD" they are not "Entirely Evil" the best way to describe hollowfaust is capitalistic.
(Also the city has a massive dracolich they summon to protect itself from armies)

>>51301444
To be fair most golems also require binding some sort of spirit to animate them. It's just usually an elemental spirit which people feel less empathy towards although elemental beings can be as intelligent or more so than the average humanoid.

Really, corporeal undead are kind of just flesh golems powered by and aligned with negative energy.

>>51301325
If you must dabble in undead creation, stick to the soulless forms. Souls are for talking to, not binding. Without the soul, making use of the bodies is just recycling.

>>51301729

Fuck I love this.

>I'M NOT SUFFERING DADDY

>>51301687
Gnomes in 5e can actually make tiny, toy-like constructs for free.

While the cost for most constructs is prohibitive, that's largely because there's no limit to how many you can control versus the hard limit to how many undead you can control. But, even so, there's examples of cheaper constructs, such as the Bogun, which originally had absolutely no cost except the materials from which it was made, which were gathered from a forest for free. They did later add a XP cost to casting the Beget Bogun spell, at 25 XP when printed in the Spell Compendium.


Cheap constructs exist, and there's no reason to assume that a spell that animated wooden skeletons would be dramatically more expensive than one that animated actual ones, without all that unfortunate grave-robbing, soul-twisting, disease-spreading, unsavory business.

>>51301826
>Cheap constructs exist, and there's no reason to assume that a spell that animated wooden skeletons would be dramatically more expensive than one that animated actual ones, without all that unfortunate grave-robbing, soul-twisting, disease-spreading, unsavory business.
The entire reason that necromancy is so cheap is because it comes with a fully complete system of animation. Creating a construct means you need to reverse engineer the same thing with advanced arcane techniques.
Boguns are similar which is why they're so cheap; they're alive and come loaded with a full set of behavioral instructions. They'll wander off if their creator doesn't manage them closely or disobey if they just don't feel like working.

>>51301325
In some settings some schools of magic, necromancy being a rather common one, are fundamentally evil. Your DM chooses and modifies the setting to his will, or fabricates it entirely, again to his will. That's one of the things DMs get to do. You can ask for a reason more elaborate than just 'black magic', like the consequences of it. In regular D&D, undead constantly bring negative energy from the plane of negative energy to whatever plane they are on (in other words, pollution). There might also be a moral compass corruption that comes with its use as well.

Maybe you can get away with having a morally dubious anti-hero. But in a setting like your DM is running, you can forget about a flat out good one.

>>51301944
Boguns are constructs, just like Homunculi. The definition of "alive" is quite broad. Ultimately, a bogun is a fine template for how other cheap constructs could be made.

The reason necromancy is cheap is to try and explain why anyone would do it. It's impractical and even dangerous, as well as disgusting and, depending on the culture, dishonorable.

But, at the same time, there's absolutely no reason that a more efficient and practical replacement is not possible. A wooden skeleton is not exactly a game-breaking concept, especially if just treated as a reskin of the animate dead spell.

The only question left unanswered is, given the opportunity, would there be any reason not to use wooden skeletons if the spells to create them were similarly costed to those that make bone skeletons?

>>51301325
in D2 necromancers literally fight Satan. your dm a shit

>>51301397
>In actuality, a Necromancer wizard is mostly fixated on disabling foes, inflicting devastating effects and leeching life and power away from their opponents
That all sounds kinda evil.

File: Creature - Homunculi 08 (dedicated wright 01).jpg (38KB, 400x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 400x480px

>>51301555
Plenty of lesser constructs you could be making.

Dedicated Wrights come to mind, mainly because
>that cost a fortune to acquire the raw materials,
they're cheap,
>phenomenal magic power to enchant,
apprentices and scrubs can make them,
>and large period of time to activate
they take a day to make, and
they can manufacture constructs for you.

>>51302140
Dedicated Wrights are 2100 GP each, far above a normal man's pay grade.

>>51302136
I mean, butchering people with swords sounds kinda evil too, doesn't it?
Sheer hostile attacks are unaligned, it's only Good, Neutral, or Evil with how you utilize them. Using the Necromancy school in this way makes it the same as Evocation. Killing a man by Enervating his life force is no different than killing a man by spearing his heart or destroying him with lightning.

>>51302163
They cost 100gp, plus 2000gp per HD beyond the first.

>>51302185
It's 100 GP for their body, mate, and 2000 GP for the unguents and reagents to activate them.
Construction line
>Craft Construct, arcane eye, fabricate; Price — (never sold); Cost 2,100 gp + 160 XP.

>>51301325
dont tamper with souls, or beings with aspirations

raising mindless skeletons, firing blight and chill touch, or using false life is just fine, or no worse than anyother wizard

>>51302233
This is how the lawful necromancer and my paladin worked together, if the soul was left free and only the body was being used, it is little different than just letting it be eaten by fungi.

>>51301325
Just play Lawful Evil. Evil doesn't mean you have to be an asshole all the time, you can just be an average guy who thinks it's groovy to make skeletons dance and get handjobs from cute zombies. The Alignment system can have as much or as little to do with your intentions as you want it to, it's the color of your Soul and less a driver of your actions. You can be the swellest guy in town but still have a pitch black soul because you eat and fuck corpses and make flesh golems just to animate them as maids in sexy maid outfits in your basement when no one's looking even though it doesn't really hurt anyone in the classical sense because your victims are already dead lumps of meat and boners.

>>51302277
>paladin
I'll tell you – all those Paladins that die to those "Evil" creatures? They deserved it. Every last one of them.

>>51302290
Do you have some issues to talk to your therapist about, Anon?

File: 1244222618915.jpg (52KB, 470x600px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 470x600px

>>51301325
Awww, you took my trolling advice from the last thread!

I'm actually kinda touched.

>>51301325
Kill him.
Raise him.

>>51301481
So necromancers are just lazy?

>>51302545
yes

>>51301826
>soul-twisting
Well you still need an animating spirit.

>>51303966
That's never been the case in D&D. Only intelligent undead keep their soul stapled to their material remains. Mindless undead have no such associations. They are animate only by the natural formation of negative energy, which creates a destructive existence.
It's still evil because if you don't keep a tight hold on it, it will run wild and try to kill everything living it sees. It also leaks a bit of negative energy into the multiverse just by existing, which piles up (when too much negative energy accumulates, an area becomes Unhallowed and undead start spontaneously rising).

>>51304008
No, I mean constructs are generally imbued with some animating spirit although they're not always specific.
I remember one that with swords that popped out of their arms which was specifically animated by a bound water elemental.

>>51304008

Well, you can't raise someone (Even with the spells that don't require a body) if they are a mindless undead so that implies SOMETHING is stopping it.

>>51304008
what about elementals? they go on a rampage if you lose control, but they are seen in a less negative light

>>51301325
the 5e PHB outright says that good necromancers exist
likewise the definition for good is "altruistic, selfless, etc"
so if your character is a necromancer who is willing to sacrifice himself for the welfare of others, and puts aside his own needs for the greater good, and avoids mass slaughter, then by all accounts he is good

>>51304174
Elementals only go on a rampage against the caster who dared to enslave them with magic. They don't rampage just because they're on the material plane. It's just really annoying to them to get summoned from their peaceful equilibrium, thrown into the material plane, and forced to do battle for an impudent mortal.
But they don't have souls so fuck 'em.

>>51301581
Nice turnabout

>>51301325
You don't. It's his campaign and since he is the one who have to put the most effort in, it's his call on what's what in his setting and fiction.

Make your own campaign and setting where necromancers are the good guys if you are stuck with your mary sue.

>>51302121
The difficulty and time need to create an anatomically correct wooden skeleton is more than enough of a barrier versus using a normal skeleton.

>>51301325
Ask him to give you a chance to prove it. Worked for me anyway.
If he still says no, then ask him for one good reason why he won't let you prove it.
If he still says because it's eeeeeviiiil, then fuck it.

>>51301749
You forgot the IMMORTAL MURDEROUS UNDEAD THAT CAN OULAST THEIR CREATOR part.

Undead in many games might be mindless, but they are aware of other creatures and they are informed by instincts based on evil.

Kind of like vermin and oozes, which are mindless yet aware of other creatures and informed on instincts of hunger to eat things. Except the only instinct undead have is to do evil, the most simple of which is killing and destroying anything alive.

>>51301325
the DM doesnt control the alignments of the players, or their class

if a DM is restricting what you can and cant be, it is not a good sign

File: Vile.png (183KB, 339x191px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 339x191px

>>51301325
y vey, if it isn't Alignment Skub bait thread™!

File: book of vile darkness, page 7.png (106KB, 409x185px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 409x185px

>>51302309

>>51301325
Necromancy brings negative energy, which makes world a worse place.
Research a way to pump it back or animate dead without it to be a nice necro.

lets settle this
http://www.strawpoll.me/12152284/r

>>51302545
Efficient. The word you're looking for is "efficient".

File: low quality bait.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>51301325
Dear OP, please cut it out. You already made a thread about the same bait topic here
>>51285902

To everyone else, stop falling for this obvious bait topic that gets posted on /tg/ all the time and it is a guaranteed 300+ replies topic. You are better than this.

>>51304530
So in other words "lazy".

Ok. But.

What if.

Guys.

What if we

Ya know,

PRETEND

For a moment...

That we don't have to have every damn discussion based on the arbitrary rules set up by the horrible game that is Dungeons and Dragons?

>>51301325

Depending on the setting that might actually not be possible.

>>51304530

Golems are higher investment but longer lasting and less risky. Necromancers are cutting corners.

>>51304582
Then why do you care if your character is """Good""" or not if you're not using D&D's alignment system to have objective measurements and qualifications of Good and Evil?
If you're bringing up another alignment system, please say so and we'll appropriately calculate whether necromancy is good or evil as relevant.
If you're not working within the confines of an alignment system where morality is determinable, then you get the canned response that good and evil do not exist, but subjectively you can be as good as you want to be.

>>51304564
Every other Fantasy story has a fucking childish sense of morality. The Good Guys are always right, the Bad Guys are always wrong, and the two are always clear and obvious. Also the Good Guys are beautiful saints and the Bad Guys are ugly monsters, because flawed heroes and beguiling villains are just too complex for Fantasy writers to comprehend.

Why are the Dark Arts dark? Who says they're dark? Why?
Why was the Chosen One chosen? By whom? What makes their judgement so special?

It's not fucking bait. It's asking people to fucking THINK about the media they consume and create.

>>51304631
The OP didn't even ask for opinions on Philosophy 101: Alignment Systems. He wanted to know how to convince his DM how to let him play his character.

Personally I just like shit like >>51301436
and >>51301729 . Creative use of Necromancy for practical and useful purposes for the betterment of society and your fellow man. Because, DnD and it's alignment system is cliche and stale at this point.

>>51304696
The answer he got is that his character doesn't work in D&D. He wants to make a square triangle.

>>51304582
OP mentions DM, which is explicitly D&D term

>>51304664
i always make a point to round things out a bit
for every instance of an archetype on the good, there is one of the bad
>ugly dumb brute on both good and bad
>good necromancer who does battle with an evil one, using his skeletons to prevent the evil ones skeletons from taking over the world
>evil cleric, who heals his henchman, and heals his foes to torture them longer, in addition to normal saintly healers

>>51304696
It doesn't matter. DM's rule is necromancers are evil. He clearly is incapable of arguing on his own behalf, and wants us to fix his DM.

So he posts a bait thread on /tg/ and doesn't get anything accomplished because OP is an idiot.

Incidentally, undead in D&D are inherently evil; even skeletons and zombies made by magic. They are not only mindless, they have willpower and they have self awareness, and they are motivated by evil. That means any necromancer in D&D that uses any animate dead spell of any sort is creating undying monsters that will - not can, but will - potentially kill people regardless of his reasons for doing so.

>>51304664
It is a topic that has been done to death, anyone with half a brain needs just 30 seconds to realize that
1) It depends on the setting
2) Morality is topic that even the world's greatest thinkers are still debating up to this day frm teh dawn of history so you won't be able to solve it.
3) Games were not designed with this in mind so thinking too much about it will just ruin your game because it makes you realize it is not real. Which is kind of the the point of it, being a glorified game of pretend.

File: good lich.png (72KB, 300x250px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 300x250px

question: is this necromancer evil?
he quite clearly risked breaking his neck to help a poor defenseless animal

>>51304757
All the bait I see here is you and anyone else not getting is that the OP probably doesn't care about the setting and DM's opinions and wants advice instead.

Meanwhile you autisticly rant defensively about your viewpoints on a fucking subject no one asked your opinion on.

You're more of a troll than this fag >>51301363 At least it would probably convince the DM.

>>51304664
>MUH EPIC GREY MORALITY WHERE WE MIGHT BE KILLING BABIES FOR A GOOD PURPOSE AND NOBODY'S REALLY GOOD OR EVIL
I get tired of this too. Sometimes it's just fucking wearisome to have "this is a mundane conflict of interests where nobody is malevolent or wrong" because either
1. it degrades into no conflict at all and everything can easily be sorted out through human discussion and settlement
or
2. you just stop giving a shit because everyone is terrible people and there's nobody to sympathize with

There is nothing wrong with craving a righteous purpose and desiring a malevolent force to overcome because it is CATHARTIC AS FUCK and EVERYONE WANTS TO WALK THE "HERO'S JOURNEY" you FAGGOTRON

File: KemmlerArt3.jpg (511KB, 945x1274px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 945x1274px

y'all niggas forget the rule of "Show don't tell"

>>51304801
There's nothing wrong with wanting a story with more moral depth than the sheen of grease on your face you man child.

>>51304825
what if he is a good wizard cursed to look ugly and threatening?

> ctrl+F Millenial King

> 0 results

come on /tg/

>>51304843
And murky "we're all dickbags" ambiguousness is only an illusion of depth. Having evident morality is not the remotely the same as lacking moral depth, and your impudent assertion is utterly offensive. You can have complex situations while still having good and bad people, and you can have simplistic situations where everyone is the same cut-and-paste "douchebag who will help or hinder based on profit margin to himself and the current average temperature of tea in Beijing".

>>51304849
>appearance
>haveing >0 relevance

>>51304882
>haveing
fuggggg
Having

>>51304889
he may look evil, with his beard and skeletons
but what if he is trying to solve the constant wars and plagues?

>>51304791
You honestly think anyone on /tg/ an convince his DM, who already things necromancy is bad, that he's wrong?

It's the DM. His rule=all rules for the setting. You can't even cope with the fact that the rules as written mean necromancy is evil. How is someone like you supposed to convince a nonexistent DM of anything?

>>51304904
the PHB states that not all necromancers are evil

>>51304780
It's a lich, there's no risk of him suffering anything.

Idiot.

>>51304791
He doesn't want advice, he wants a good necromancy thread.

>>51304911
he only looks tough, he is actually CR 1/4

>>51304801
>There is nothing wrong with craving a righteous purpose and desiring a malevolent force to overcome because it is CATHARTIC AS FUCK and EVERYONE WANTS TO WALK THE "HERO'S JOURNEY" you FAGGOTRON

most people grow out of this

>>51304910
DM makes the rules. PHB is meaningless. He says necromancy is evil in his setting, then necromancy is evil in his setting. OP is being THAT GUY and you're encouraging him.

>>51304875
Look. We all know you get a chubby when you can slaughter Orc babies friviouslilly, and are damn near brought to orgasm when someone cries "Dues Vult!" But lets be honest here and agree that your "complex" morality is about as complex as the line of shit sweat you leave on your whities and just as foul.

That system gets old as soon as you realize that as soon as you've mad an evil character and a good character you've explored the heights of your roleplaying experience.

Maybe you should go play videogames if you just want to be the stalwart hero or dickbad antihero. I heard Masseffect just went on sale this week.

>>51304916
It's a lich, and you've clearly been mind controlled by it, because there is no CR 1/4 lich.

AND YOU WONDER WHY PEOPLE THIN NECROMANCY IS EVIL?!

File: Dexter DM.jpg (22KB, 399x310px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 399x310px

>>51304919
found the DM

>>51304892
He has good intentions. Wonder what else he has... And the cost of the dark magic depends on the setting. Is it worth it?

>>51304948
he takes the burden so we dont have to, is there nothing more noble than to languish in pain and misery if it means helping others?

>>51304952
Put that way, yeah, it's cool.

>>51304930
And ambiguous morality gets old as soon as you realize that you made a morally grey jerk who helps and hinders based on profit margin to himself and the current price of real estate on the moon, and there's nowhere else to go from there.
Look, we've gone in a circle. Shall we needle and insult each other more? Good storytelling has nothing to do with the objectivity of morality in the setting.

>>51304941
No, you found someone who actually understands how RPGs work.

If you don't want to deal with a real GM, go play something on a computer.

>>51304963
are you seriously defending Dexter "you are my pawns" as an example of a good GM?

>>51304963
Point on the dolly where "that guy" hurt you.

>>51304970
No, I'm defending "setting rules>book rules" which is something every single RPG pushes.

You are literally encouraging someone who is saying "I want to make a super special snowflake character in my GM's game even though he said that's not how it works".

How does it feel to be a mary-sue and That Guy advocate, anon? Feel good?

>>51304959
>Good storytelling has nothing to do with the objectivity of morality in the setting.

Then why are you defending duelistic morality you autist? I mean, come on, at least be consistant. If you don't the GM will give you -5 goodboy points!

>>51304973
>In my setting, orcs are green and worship nature spirits + this pantheon...
>NO THEY ARE GREY AND ARE DOLLS OF GRUUMSH
>Matt, I'm the GM, I-
>REEEE

>>51304959
That's not moral ambiguity. That's just being an asshole.

Moral ambiguity is the fact that everyone thinks they're the hero in their own story. Everyone thinks they're the Good Guys. That's what leads good people to do terrible things. That's what leads people to follow charismatic dictators - they look good, and sound good, so they must BE good, right? How can this thing I'm doing be bad, when it feels so cathartic?

>>51304992
I'm defending it only because you're dissing it. Again, the quality has nothing to do with the objectivity. This means you can have a setting with absolute, Zoroastrian hardline Radiant Good Guys and Pitch Black Bad Dudes, and still write a compelling and interesting story from it.

>>51304996
just have more than one race of ork

>>51305007
>I don't care if it's your game, you have to do what I want because I say so.
Entitled much, anon?

>>51305021
this is where you collude with the GM to ensure everyone is happy

its very much give and take, but there has got to be some way to include everything at no ones expense

>>51304996
>Hey Joe, what if we're tired of all the same old shit?
>I had an idea about -
>MATT! I'm the GM it's MY GAME! MINE MINE MINE!
>REEEEEEEEEE

>>51305004
>This means you can have a setting with absolute, Zoroastrian hardline Radiant Good Guys and Pitch Black Bad Dudes, and still write a compelling and interesting story from it.

By not focusing on those guys, and instead looking at the flawed, imperfect people in-between, sure.

Perfection is boring. Bad guys with no redeeming qualities are boring. How are the bad guys even getting anything done, if they're so obviously lacking in virtue? How are they getting any support? Why haven't the super-speshul good guys wiped them out yet? What possible weaknesses could the good guys have? What even makes the good guys so good in the first place?

So fucking childish.

>>51305004
Even Zoroastianism has morally grey archtypes in the mythos. Mazda still allows suffering / the devil to roam around and corrupt humanity. Every Good /Evil duelistic religion still has to answer the origin of evil question to stand any chance of gaining a following. And "for your own good" had always been the morally grey reality that has shaped those religions.

>>51305032
>I don't want to play in your world.
>Fine, feel free to GM.

>>51305128
>Writes the story for himself.
>Not the group as a whole.
>Doesn't OK setting with group before hand.

Noo... bad GM. Bad! No!

>>51301566
Objectively, good and evil aren't real. It's one's perception that's subjective.

>>51301325
You cheeky fuck, I saw this exact post on the last "durr, why is dark magic ebil, hurr" thread. I even remember that anon being condescending, saying that's not how you make quality bait posts, and wrote that as an example.

>>51305153
>writes the story for the group as a whole
>group agrees its okay
>has a plot that requires necromancy be evil
>hey GM I wanna be the good necromancer because you said all necromancy is evil!
>fucking special snowflakes.

>>51301665
Weren't real life necromancers just folks who talked to the spirits of the dead?

>>51305249
Yes.

Necromancy literally means "divination by the use of the dead,"

>>51301566
No one who realizes that is going to be arrogant enough to to shout, "I am good!" from the rooftops, like Americans and ISIS often do.

>>51305300
But anon. America is good.

>>51301436

Wouldn't that be a cleric or paladin?

>>51305077
Not him but you are missing the original point here. The point that you are just assuming that the imaginary world around you is real, and it makes logical sense.

All you do is ask questions on why is this happening? Why is this so? Why is that so? How does this work? etc. and you call the other childish because he doesn't answer all your questions of infinite whys. You are normal curious intelligent person for trying to find the answers for these.

But the truth is that this fantasy world is not real, it is an imaginary place that needs to be filtered from detail and shrunken down to bare bones basic ideas because those basic ideas are the ones necessary to facilitate a story and use the framework rules of abstraction that the game is built up on. Adding masses of information that barely touches on the core concept can be interesting but it also detracts from the original purpose of the game. It is not hard at all to poke holes in works of fiction just by basic common sense, simply because they are fiction with a certain goal. They subordinate everything for the certain goal they have and if you are only trying to point this out then well done but this is something everybody knows already.

You can create a long history of a car's creations from the people that created the plans for the previous models the alterations they added to it the colors they drafted for it, the creation of the intricate machinery that propels it and the emotions that led its owner to buy it. But at the end of the day it is just a car, a machine wit ha purpose to get your from point A to point B quicker than you can go on your feet.

Also claiming that something is boring and childish, translates short on
>my tastes = good
>your tastes = shit

>>51301325
OP is a fag. We've done this thread hundred, probably thousands of times before and every time you retards go for the most purile cliche you can. Necromancy (the fantasy version) is evil, capital E evil. You can still use it to do good but you're gonna contend with the fact that every reasonable human being around you thinks you're doing fucked up shit. There are plenty of roleplay and character opportunities for that, it's got some strong pathos. But you faggots always want to play the special snowflake who gets wants to be a dark force user with all the cool lightning powers but also be "good" so you don't have to roleplay everything hate you.

>>51301325
Start a hashtag on twitter
>#NotAllNecromancers

>>51301325
Worshipper of Anubis, LG god of the dead

>>51304320
It hardly needs be anatomically correct, anymore than a bone skeleton needs to be undamaged or complete.

Consider the potential spell "Animate Effigy", which would give a shambling semblance of life to any wooden+cloth sculpture of medium size or smaller.

There's really no reason for this spell to be more expensive or difficult to cast than Animate Dead, especially if it has a similar limit to how many you can control (or, how many you can impart you imagination of how they would move). There are plenty of examples of cheap constructs, and a theoretical equivalent would be for an Unseen Servant to animate or "wear" such an effigy.

As for the cost of such a construction, a trip into the woods for an hour or so should provide the basic branches you would need, and cheap burlap or twine is enough to keep it together if the spell doesn't already do that for you.

>>51301325
Diablo 2 necromancer type fight evil with evil

>>51306430
Which does not make him good. Being the protagonist does not mean automatically being good.

What is wrong with being LN or TN? You want to use evil means and don't let social or religious norms stop you, yet you want acceptance and justification by the big cataloguing system in the sky? You lay down wih dogs, you get up with fleas.

>>51304200
Outsiders generally do have souls, their souls are just the same as their bodies unlike mortals that have them separate.

>>51301325
Start a movement
#NotAllNecromancers

>>51301583
>>51306145
>>51306614
stahp

>>51306654
The problem is, there's a clear correlation between bleeding heart liberals and the people who get upset about people who animate corpses being called evil.

File: 1455178960770.jpg (17KB, 468x297px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 468x297px

>>51304619
>Necromancers are the Chinese

File: 1484913884617.png (1022KB, 922x466px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 922x466px

>>51306654
No.
See, Necromancers in OUR cultures are great. They shepherd the souls of the departed to the afterlife.

And raise the bodies of the recently deceased to aide the living. They do manual labor, like harvesting / moving goods. Hell, they even pull our rickshaws, because horses aren't native to our island and canonically we don't even know what the fuck is a horse.

Stop implying Necromancers = Evil Wizards and start seeing Necromancers as the Shepards of the Dead that they are
#NotMyNecromancer

>>51306746
There's a difference between Nagash and Sabriel, y'know

>>51306760
And there's a difference between a knight protecting his king and country and a bandit that loots and pillages, but in the end of the day they're (usually) just a man holding a weapon yet Fighters aren't always labeled as Evil

>>51304572
Efficient. The word you're looking for is "efficient".

>>51305700
>

File: 1474236567027.png (76KB, 500x417px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 500x417px

>>51301325
Make a necromancer. Make them good. Avoid whatever moral pitfalls the DM tries to put in your path.
Either you tell the story of a guy reforging a dark tool to a noble purpose, or an eventual madman losing sight of his original goal for the promise of power.
Either way, it makes a cool story (bro), so you're doing it right.

>>51302136
>That all sounds kinda evil.
So does incinerating people with magical fire, dominating their wills with enchantments or turning them into stone.

>>51306842
See, I'm fine with neutral but dangerous necromancy, but enchanters need to be shot on sight. Makes things so much fucking easier.

>>51306807
So in strictly speaking "lazy".

>>51306864
In my DM's setting, necromancy and mind-affecting spells both get you a death sentence. Good call if you ask me.

>>51306898
in mine all magic users who don't submit to having their familiars ripped away and being drafted into perpetual military service are hunted down and killed. We do have necromancers though but they're deployed as sort of terror weapons

>>51301325
look at the diablo II necromancers and their philosophy.

also alignments are a stupid concept.

>>51301397
>using evil means to good ends is neutral

I think you mean chaotic good.

>>51301325
You never raise dead, you just put them back

File: 1457417459533.jpg (970KB, 1280x1745px) Image search: [Google]

970KB, 1280x1745px

FUCK OFF YOU MEATBAGS I WANT TO LIVE

File: Skeleton Wizard.jpg (313KB, 854x1200px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 854x1200px

>>51301325
Just play a necromancer the way you want anyway and let your DM throw a sissy fit and write "CE" in your alignment block all he wants. Won't stop you from preforming good actions with the help of your skellie bros

File: 1470381366566.jpg (368KB, 1351x1004px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1351x1004px

>>51307803
...if the GM doesn't cockblock it

>>51306132
>

>>51306889
Efficient. The word you're looking for is "efficient".

>>51307851
Didn't you reply like that at least 3 times, and deleted two previous posts?
Or is this the work of an enemy stand?

>>51307803
Yeah, just ignore the GM's rulings! What could possibly go wrong?

>>51307874
I was just waiting to see how long it would take for someone to notice that both arguments were retarded
Also, I wasn't the original poster of this, so he may have deleted another post that I don't know anything about

>>51301325
Tell the GM that you're playing an evil Necromancer that's trying to normalise necromancy by making it useful and thus lulling the citizens into a false sense of security. Then just never follow through with the dastardly plan.

>>51306430
They are TN, their god is about keeping the balance. If any supernatural force like heaven or hell meddle too much with the mortal realm, they fight them.
In the game, hell went too far. Hence bonespears up their asses.

>>51305004
> Zoroastrian hardline Radiant Good Guys and Pitch Black Bad Dudes
You meant Manicheanism not Zoroastianism.

File: bone browsing.jpg (27KB, 370x229px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 370x229px

>>51307886
That's not "ignoring the GM's rulings". That's "ignoring stuff that has no consequences to your playstyle". If the GM says your necromancer becomes CE (or NE or LE), fine, so be it. You can still play it like a CN, N, or whatever. Heck, nothing stops you from doing LG stuff on the side of the evil stuff. Because alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive.

>>51308300
>Because alignment is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Not in Grognardia it ain't.

>>51305817
Well, it's in a human's nature to question and understand everything he is needed to/has an interest in/needs to survive. In the case of P&P RPGs, you are(or at least schould be) interested in the world your GM presents you with.

If the GM hasn't talked about the setting with the group, or even just the intentions and ideas behind the setting, what is a player going to go off? If the GM says "Fantasy setting" you understand it as a world, very similar to ours, only with magic and dragons mixed in. There's still gravity, water, stars and some such. And if there's still humans, why would you automatically assume they were/had to be any different from us(apart from different levels of 'advancement')?

And if they're not different from us, then they're certainly not all either super-good or super-evil. I'd argue it is far more deterring having a different world in it's foundation from ours, human intentions and behaviours included, as you DO need to explain that, at least in some form of "these people are this way because...".
But in a world where humans evolved and had to fight for survival like ours, I'd be hard pressed to feel immersed in if they were all either this or that.

>>51301325

DEPENDS ON THE SETTING

File: IMG_0283.png (22KB, 300x250px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x250px

>Started out playing neutral/good necromancer in game because why not
>Realized it was more fun to be Palpatine levels of being an evil dick and enjoying it
>turned our party evil
>The campaign became even more fun as we all became silly dick heads but we're still trying to save the world anyway because we were already doing it
>The gods faces when they realized WE were the ones they had to rely on to not destroy all of reality
It's been a fun campaign so far

File: pic_050_clean_790.jpg (81KB, 790x1053px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 790x1053px

>>51301325
My first incursion in Pathfinder was as a necromancer. I was not just a regular necromancer, but a priest of the church of Lazarus, the first revived by necromancy powers of Jesus Christ.

I was doing god's work. Check mate atheists.

>>51301325
I think you should try to speak to your GM about what it is you want to be able to do as a good necromancer, because I feel like that what a necromancer does in terms of spells and minions depends firstly on SETTING, and secoundly on the characters morals.

Take Diablo 2 for instance, there you had a good necromancer. He was effectively the same as the rest of the player classes, but his skills were different yet he fought the evils of Hell just as well - and I'd argue that this particular one has laid out a lot of peoples understanding of what a necromancer should or is suppossed to do. So that is one way of doing about it: Fighting crime by raising the dead, flinging curses and making people rot from the inside out.

However you could also have a good necromancer, by using necromancy to defeat necromancers. For instance in Pathfinder and I think in DnD 3.5, clerics can either get turn undead or command undead. And I have always been of the conviction that given the choice, Command is far superior in that it includes the ability to make the undead walk away, BUT also so much more - because you can command them around, like making them attack their master or make them docile. A similar approach could surely be applied to applied to other necromancy spells and abilities. Communing with the spirits of the dead, could be used to find murderers, or solve nearly any question that modern psychic mediums claim that they would be able to, but also you could commune with dead necromancers to have them reveal their secrets. Haunting ghosts could be dealt with easily by using necromancy.

I really think that you could make your GM let you play a good necromancer, it just depends on his setting and then how you will apply the necromancy in the game world. And even if he says something like: "Necromancy turns people who use it evil" or "It is inherently evil to use necromancy". Then you could have your character do wrong for the right reasons.

>>51309360
I believe that in GURPS Banestorm, there is a Christian nation that has these exact views on necromancy and Jesus Christ.

>>51309422
I love GURPS.

>>51309470
It is pretty good, but the Banestorm setting sounds like a lot of fun.

File: surf.jpg (101KB, 2000x1127px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 2000x1127px

>>51309422
Is it a big setting?

>>51304825
Where do you even buy a podium like that? It's so fucking kitschy.

Currently playing a "Good" necromancer
He was an enchanter who, when a loved one died, turned to Necromancy to frantically find a way to bring them back.
Don't act like Necromancy isn't frowned upon. Hence, mine acts/pretends as an enchanter. (Most of his spellbook is enchantment spells from his past, he has high charisma, etc)
Either way, he sole purpose for devoting his life to Necromancy is just to bring back his wife, not some lich power trip-- I thus consider him good, albeit that he under the "Road to Hell is paved with good intentions" saying.

That being said, I'm also playing him because I really wanted to play a necro and it was a "good" themed campaign

Necromancy brings the ultimate good. Free energy. No more starving and toiling in the fields, you could free humanity from menial tasks so they can focus on health, art, and philosophy.

>>51307874
Ctrl-V is a much more efficient way of replying.

File: Снимок.png (31KB, 394x61px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 394x61px

>>51309716
>Free energy
>Free
AHEM

>>51309716
Yes it would but now you'll have 50 posts telling you how your wrong and how(even though no DnD book states it) they destroy wildlife(for some rasin) or go on about diseases(as if someone would be retarded enough to use zombies and not skeletons) so have fun with that

>>51309810
That's so vauge it's almost worse than pathfinders rules on becoming a lich

>>51309839
Not that anon, but in Planescape, every undead has a tether leading to the negative energy plane, and those tethers eat away the fabric of reality and open up more holes to the plane of negative energy.

Which makes it easier for evil free-willed undead to arise.

>>51309839
Think of it like radiation or shit.
If there's too much negative energy, everything will be a grey dreadland
Like shadowblack or whatever that place was called

>>51306824
There ya go.

>>51301325
Nuclear engines are powered by black magic and you can still do good with a stick of uranium.

>>51308300
>GM rules no good necromancers because necromancy is bad.
>LOL I'll just do good shit anyway!
>Somehow not ignoring the GM's rulings.

Well, looks like you got me!

>>51305786

A cleric or paladin is ONE way to do it but people forget that spells like Undeath to Death is a Wizard/Sorcerer spell too and also a necromancy spell. Wizards get the better tools for throwing at destroying undead, as a whole. Clerics get some inbuilt ones but wizards get the better ones.

>>51307338
I think you misunderstand the alignment of "Chaotic"

>>51310740
Chaotic is evil

>>51301325
A Necromancer that only resurrects those that have died out of time, been betrayed or seemingly died just short of greatness. He resurrects them not so that they can just take revenge but to change the world for the better.

Make a merchant necromancer, he only offers help to people if they sign his totally legit contract wherein it states they release control of their body and soul after death, in extremely tiny print.

Bandits? Killers? Monsters? First turn on battle, tell them it will be a verbal contract where they will have no control of their bodies or souls after dying if they wish to fight/kill you. Then, offer them a silver lining where you promise to bury them and give them a grave marker when their service is no longer required.

Necromancy is good, the petty small minded men will never understand that the only path to progress is the path of suffering and pain.
Romans had to conquer everything first before being able to make it better didnt they?
Necromancy is only an example of ends justifying the means.
In other words if your goal is noble and good necromancy is thus good and noble, if you want to use it to burn and pillage villages for no good reason, then fuck no.
but if you raise the skeletons of the villages dead to fight off an orc raiding party that is going to kill everyone and burn everything it is justifiable

In my setting there's 3 schools of necromancy.

>raising the memory - the "necromancer" raises a ghostly image of the subject.
The image is based partly on the subject itself and partly on the necromancers powers/memories of the subject. This is considered neutral because it doesn't actually touch the subject.

>Raising the body - the necromancer raises the subjects body/skeleton.
This is considered evil because there's no reason to raise the body except for its power.

>raising the soul
The "necromancer"(usually a priest) raises the soul of the subject as a ghostly apparition briefly before sending them off. This is usually considered good because it is done to provide the subject one last chance to talk to loved ones before passing on

>>51301325
>industrial necromancy
????

>>51310231
I'm not sure if you're baiting or actually that stupid.

>>51301325
the magic maybe evil, however what really matters is intent and actions. Maybe the pragmatic mage realized that a battlefield full of corpses could be used to prevent anymore of his countrymen from falling in battle.

>>51315007
I don't see what's stupid about listening to the GM when they say something.

>>51315498
>what you want don't want to slaughter random people for no reason? well I've decided that your character is an edgemeister bad guy and if you don't wanna ride my railroad then I'll assume direct control and make your character a dmpc
I mean even assuming necromancy is evil and therefore necromancers are evil by that evil action you're arguing that means that they must always be evil in everything no matter what and can never make any actions that could be construed as good.
That's like saying that the guy playing the rogue HAS to steal literally everything and isn't allowed to buy anything legitimately because if they steal then they're a thief and can only ever commit thievery.

Although I hold out hope that you're just baiting and not this stupid/autistic.

http://www.strawpoll.me/12152284/r

only 13 votes, but it seems like good necromancers are fine on principle

>>51315775
You aren't listening, which really isn't that surprising. The GM has declared a facet of their setting and game. If you don't like it, either play something else or don't play at all, don't passive-aggressively ignore it like a cunt.

Nice strawman, by the way. Really makes you look like you know what you're talking about.

>>51315849
I am listening but you're completely oblivious to the point which is why I made the guess that you may be on the autism spectrum.

The issue is not whether necromancy and therefore necromancers are evil in general or in a particular setting, but demanding that the gm be allowed to completely micromanage what the players are allowed to do, it's just short of playing by yourself and having all the characters be dmpcs.

Demon summoning is evil, that doesn't mean someone who has summoned a demon has to kick every puppy they see, unless that's part of some bizarre deal with the devil.

I mean this isn't even "paladin code" stuff where if you don't act in accordance with evil then you lose your necromantic powers, you're literally advocating the gm taking choice of action completely away from the players.

>If you don't like it, either play something else or don't play at all, don't passive-aggressively ignore it like a cunt.
wew kid, calm down.
I'm not the original person and I certainly wouldn't want to play in game where the gm forces the players to act as he dictates, I mean that's less a game and more just being a prop for someone's mental masturbation.

Actually neither the op nor the person who started this reply chain gave any indication that the dm forced necromancers to be all evil all the time with their every action, just that all necromancers are evil because necromancy is evil.
You're the one who pulled this convoluted hypothetical scenario interpretation out of your ass where players completely lose all choice of action and HAVE to "choose" to act exactly how you tell them or they should find another game.
That's another clue that you may be a sperg, obsessively controlling and unable to comprehend normal human social interaction and communication.

>>51316126
>doesn't mean someone who has summoned a demon has to kick every puppy they see, unless that's part of some bizarre deal with the devil.
steal'n dis

>>51316174
Yeah I can imagine it but it's kinda bizarre and a waste of a good demon deal. Maybe a deal with an eccentric or even crazy demon who decides to focus on spreading dickishness.

>>51316174
Ayy