Community

Ok, so I have mixed feelings about the Necromancer speciality. I really like the concept, and the feats are really flavourful and evocative....and I understand them wanting to restrict it to casters only....but as it stands now, there are two ways to meet the prerequisites for the speciality, and yet have the first level feat be completely useless to you.

Just a reminder for those who don't remember the Necromancer's first level feat, it's called Aura of Souls. As an action, you can capture the soul of one creature within 50 feet of you that has died within the last minute. You can have up to two of these souls and they fade after a minute. When you cast a necromancy spell, you can expend one of these souls to grant yourself advantage on one attack roll made for the spell, or give one target of the spell disadvantage on one saving throw made against the spell.

Problem One: Ok, pop quiz. Which classes are capable of casting spells? The Wizard, Cleric, and Sorcerer can all cast spells, and all have access to necromancy spells, so they work with Aura of Souls just fine.

But wait, the Warlock can technically cast spells too! Being able to cast ritual versions of spells still counts.

Thing is, not only are none of the spells on the Warlock list necromancy spells, but the only necromancy spell in the playtest packet that can be cast as a ritual is Speak with Dead, which requires no roll.
In fact, even if we gave the Warlock some necromancy rituals, he can't cast spells in battle anyways. He uses invocations! They don't get a spell school, nor do they count as spells, even if they do require making a "magical attack".

Problem two: High Elves. As a racial feature, all High Elves gain a cantrip. In other words, all High Elves are able to cast at least one spell. Which is exactly what the prerequisite for taking Aura of Souls is!

Problem is, there are no necromancy cantrips in the playtest. And if I'm playing, say, a High Elf Fighter or High Elf Rogue, that's the only spell I get. So once again, Aura of Souls is left useless.


Now, I don't like this. I don't like this one bit. Even if you disregard people using High Elves to create Fighter Necromancers, the idea that a Warlock shouldn't be able to be a Necromancer is horrible! A Warlock who sold his soul for knowledge so he can gain mastery over the undead is a very flavourful and resonant concept that I'm sure lots of people want to play.

My proposed solution is a simple one. Drop the necromancy requirement, and rephrase the feat like this:

"Whenever you cast a spell or make a magical attack, you may expend a soul to gain advantage on one attack roll or impose disadvantage on one of a single target's saving throws."

By including the "magical attack" phrasing, then a Warlock Necromancer can enhance his Eldritch Blast, or a Sorcerer Necromancer, on top of enhancing his necromancy spells can also enhance his Sorcerous Powers.

So, what do you guys think? Is this a good fix for the Necromancer Speciality? If not, how would you fix it? Or do you think it's fine as it is?

Aug 21, 2012 -- 9:50AM, Mand12 wrote:

Please remove the requirement to cast spells.

Tweak the L1 feature to work with any attack.


If a specialty can grant limited spellcasting ability (cleric orisons, wizard cantrips), why can't this one do the same?  Why must there be other ability there already?

The fighter necromancer is an awesome concept, and I see no reason why it should be excluded.

While I do agree with you that Figher Necromancers are an awesome idea, and that the casting prerequisite is lame, I'm a little afraid that it might be an impossible fight. Even before this playtest packet came out, there was tons of buzz about making Fighter Necromancers when an article somewhere first implied that a theoretical Necromancer theme would be restricted to casters. But despite the general consensus that Fighter Necromancers are awesome, it seems someone is determined to not let us play them. Which makes me sad.

That said, I suppose if we wanted to drop the casting requirements we could phrase it like this:

"Whenever you make an attack role, or a creature makes a saving throw in response to an attack of yours, you may expend a soul to gain advantage on one attack roll or impose disadvantage on one of a single target's saving throw."

...that probably isn't the most elegant way to phrase it, but it conveys the general idea.

Aug 21, 2012 -- 9:50AM, Mand12 wrote:

Please remove the requirement to cast spells.

How in the heck do you get a Necro that can't cast spells? And what good would it be compared to one who can?