Larian Studios
An guy in another forum said that he managed to access lv 5 on EA, using "alterations", and he posted screenshots. I will not post link to the topic since I believe that it violates the rules here but apparently, there are a single summon limit which only applies to the player, NPC's can have hordes of undead while players can't. The same BS which is present on nwn2 and literally every "magic rework", like spell fixes and warlock reworked, both extremely popular mod fixes it. It literally kills the necromancer class. Why not do like Solasta and not include necromancer wizard specialization? Having a necromancer class that only exists to cause frustration and disappointment among the players who love this class is AWFUL!!!

On P&P, 5e already has the most nerfed necromancer class compared to 2e and 3e, with no OHK spells and only low CR undead available.

Sadly, only Pathfinder wrath of the righteous will have decent necromancy. With a path to lichdoom, ability to reanimate bosses to serve you and on kingmaker, empower your undead minions, raising his attributes and even giving divine spells to then when you become more "godlike". Even on kingmaker, animate dead raises d4+2 skeletons, an sorcerer using all spell slots can have 6*(d4+2) skeletons. Lich is the second most popular mythic path on WoTR. If Vincke wanna encourage people to play evil, having good necromancy is a good start!!!

[Linked Image]

Nobody is asking for this type of necromancy in a low level 'dungeons & kobolds' 5e campaign. Only that Larian follows the rules and let necromancers have at least a skeleton squad!!! Every game which has popular necromancy allows multiple undead creation.
With a four man squad of summoners I went through my first playthrough on divinity original sin 2, and I was disappointed that you only had a single unit per character to work with. Their reasoning likely is that too many summonables will make the fights way too easy and conversely incredibly difficult to balance for all other classes as well. My counterpoint to that is, that if I play summoner, I want it to be easy, that's in the very nature of this class, you look at diablo 2 for example, an old blizzard classic, and everyone had you recommend to start a necromancer as your first character because it is less reliant on items and also got you through the difficult parts of the game.

Now, personal preference and my "game design knowledge" and all that blah blah, it's meaningless here, I don't get paid for making this game, the guys working in their studios are, and they got plenty of madmen shouting thrilling ideas into their ears as it is. But I do want to point out one thing: a summoner class that cannot summon any monsters is not a concept, it's a disaster.

And also, worst of all, probably no fun at all.
Originally Posted by Ben Thunder
recommend to start a necromancer as your first character because it is less reliant on items and also got you through the difficult parts of the game.

Now, personal preference and my "game design knowledge" and all that blah blah, it's meaningless here, I don't get paid for making this game, the guys working in their studios are, and they got plenty of madmen shouting thrilling ideas into their ears as it is. But I do want to point out one thing: a summoner class that cannot summon any monsters is not a concept, it's a disaster.

And also, worst of all, probably no fun at all.


Fun >>>> Balance.

Necromancer was amazing on D2.

And necromancer is a popular class. Lich is the second most popular mythic path on wrath of the righteous...
I was not aware that we had necromancers to remove.
OHKOs were stupid and not fun. Reloading a fight until you OHKO the big guy is not a good game design. I'm glad they got rid of it ine 5E.

Animate dead should be able to reanimate as many weak and stupid zombies/squeletons as you want though. Providing they are weak enough that you don't end up with more than 3/4.

Necromancers are supposed to gain an added zombie when casting Animate dead at level 6, I guess they're the only one who will be able to have more than 1.
If we are setting aside 5e mechanics for a second. . .

I wouldn't even put an arbitrary cap on how many minions a necromancer could have. Give the summon a spell slot, give the summon a decay rate, and let the player figure it out from there. I would also have any undead summons initially come stock with no equipment but the option to arm them with whatever you have found on the battlefield. However, since undead are essentially mindless, I would also give them an extremely rudimentary AI and absolutely no player control beyond equipment and augmentation and also they are always flat footed and have no natural AC beyond any armor or buffs given to them because they are not concerned with the damage they take. Nor can they be healed in any way. Damage taken is absolute.

No additional summons beyond first level, but the ability to use higher level spell slots for summoning to increase, say, the endurance and competency of those same undead which will eventually result in only having a couple of truly badass minions and quite a few trash mobs of varying quality. There would definitely be higher level spells to enhance and buff those summons, however, in addition to the usually array of necromancer shit one would expect to have at their disposal.

So, as an example, first level summon is skeleton, it tears itself out of the exploitable corpse of a downed opponent. It lasts for 12 hours before the magic used to hold it together is no longer sufficient to keep it whole, at which point it begins losing pieces of itself over the next 12 hours until becoming inert. Use a fifth level spell slot and you get that specific corpse in its entirely as a zombie, which moves faster and with greater precision as well as possessing additional strength and hit points. After 24 hours its skin sloughs off leaving a skeleton. At ninth level, the wounds from battle on that raised NPC are healed completely and you get them as they were before they died, all abilities intact, double the HP. After 24 hours they become a zombie, 24 hours after that a skeleton,

You can raise as many undead as you have spell slots, which could be potentially quite a few.
I dont know if it was a bug or not, but using the wand you get from the hag i was able to summon the zombie along with my companion which might indicate you can have multiple summons.
i dont play 5e but it is my understanding that some spells require concentration, maybe some summons require this so you can only have one summons at a time while others dont require concentration and would allow multiple summons.

If the game dosent allow multiple summons then +1 please allow us to summons as many as we want with time restrictions or some other limiting mechanic, i love being a summoner and summoning armies of monsters.
According to PnP animate dead allows you to create a skelleton or zombie from the corpse of a small or medium humanoid. It lasts 24h and has a casting time of 1 min (means only outside of combat). Its a lv3 spell and casting it at higher levels gives you control over more corpses. You can give all of them the same command with a bonus action. It does not require concentration.

There are several conjuration spells (some of them allow several summons at once) that require conjuration.
Losing concentration means the creature becomes hostile.

So a high lv mage could have many summons by using animate dead and conjure minor elementals, since both spells allow more creatures when you cast it at higher levels.
The elementals act themselves, the mage has to use a bunus action to give all undead the same command and they do this until the mage commands something else.
Originally Posted by Umsche
OHKOs were stupid and not fun. Reloading a fight until you OHKO the big guy is not a good game design. I'm glad they got rid of it ine 5E.


1 - The game is not designed around save scumming. You need to maximize the save DC to have a good powerful OHK spell
2 - You can't reload in P&P
3 - You can't reload in multi player NWN1/2 games.
4 - Enemies casts this spells on the player too.

Originally Posted by DistantStranger
If(...)


Better than single summon limit but still not like P&P.

Madscientist explained well how things works on the game.
I kind of wanted to create a necromancer character.
I am not too concerned about these things though... modders will eventually add it to the game even if Larian wont.

Don't worry OP.
Originally Posted by Eddiar
I kind of wanted to create a necromancer character.
I am not too concerned about these things though... modders will eventually add it to the game even if Larian wont.

Don't worry OP.


Yep. Same with NWN2. Necromancer in the base game is TRASH. With mods aka spell fixes, it becomes so amazing...
In regard to the one summon limit, there is a mechanic in place that means the player can only have one summoned thing for which they are the source. Summons from other sources (certain wands, and certain spider egg sacs), do not count against this limit.

You can, in fact, test this in game already without any alterations: Play any character that can access both Find Familiar, and Mage Hand. Because Mage Hand counts a s summon int he current game implementation, summoning your mage hand immediately kills your familiar, and summoning a familiar immediately dispels your mage hand. this is another case where Larian's implementation and changes have been made without a wider consideration of the consequences, but more than that, there's no reason for there to be a summon limit at all, provided the spells and abilities that allow you to access them are properly implemented.

Edit: Yes, I've already submitted this first as a bug report, and then also as a feedback form report... but I'd encourage others to do so as well.
Originally Posted by Niara
I

You can, in fact, test this in game already without any alterations: Play any character that can access both Find Familiar, and Mage Hand. Because Mage Hand counts a s summon int he current game implementation, summoning your mage hand immediately kills your familiar, and summoning a familiar immediately dispels your mage hand.


Than, Larian really wanna kill necromancers.

Why noit just remove the wizard subclass?
Single summoning limit is omething that is around since nwn2 probably something that was put in for balancing. But was not needed in bg npc could summon as well creating interesting battle scenarious.
I don't even know why this limit is retained to start with.
Originally Posted by Rieline
Single summoning limit is omething that is around since nwn2 probably something that was put in for balancing. But was not needed in bg npc could summon as well creating interesting battle scenarious.
I don't even know why this limit is retained to start with.


1 - In a SP game, FUN > Balance.
2 - A lot of D&D games din't had this BS
3 - Consistency in mechanics and lore >>>> balance. And a necromancer unable to control two undeads makes ZERO sense.
4 - Balance is subjective. Some people complain about bolt action rifles and shotguns on BF1, literally the less used weapons in the game and the weapons which people should use the most in a WW1 scenario.
5 - D&D was never balanced, except 4e which is the worst edition by far.

And even 4e, WoTC prefered to not include necromancy for the sake of the balance dogma than including a USELESS SINGLE summon limit on 4e. 4e was awful but at least they din't included an SUB class that serves to nothing but to cause frustration among the class fans.
I dunno about Necromancers & their origin story in D&D that much.
Only those of Warcraft & Diablo. (lol)

But I must say I find it really wierd that Clerics have this "Necrotic hands"(?) spell.
3d10necrotic makes all the healing-touch spells also look like dogsh°° in comparisation.
So Clerics are not Healers but dmg dealers too in the end. :-|
Feels very out of place currently.
What about wait until we can actualy try necromancer, before we start complain to his uselessness? laugh
Originally Posted by JustAnotherBaldu
I dunno about Necromancers & their origin story in D&D that much.
Only those of Warcraft & Diablo. (lol)

But I must say I find it really wierd that Clerics have this "Necrotic hands"(?) spell.
3d10necrotic makes all the healing-touch spells also look like dogsh°° in comparisation.
So Clerics are not Healers but dmg dealers too in the end. :-|
Feels very out of place currently.


Clerics on D&D aren't healers like in a mmo.

They are representatives of a deity in the material plane. D&D is not the generic mmo about gear farming and cooldown managing. The spell system for eg, is based on literature(Jack Vance). And necromancers are a wizard specialization, you have evokers, abjurers, conjurers, illusionists(...) 5e already has the weakest necromancy on D&D franchise, with a single summon limit, there are no reason to even have it on the game.

Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
What about wait until we can actualy try necromancer, before we start complain to his uselessness? laugh


Because even without a ridiculous single summon limit, 5e necromancers are already the weakest wizard specialization. If Larian wanna a single summon limit, honestly, just REMOVE THE SUBCLASS. Is less awful than having a class that only serves to cause frustration on the fans of thta subclass.
It's not necessarily a bad thing to just get one summon if that creature is powerful, imo. I mean sure, it's nice to swarm enemies with lots of cannon fodder type summons, I guess, but... I am quite fine with summoning one powerful bastard instead to avoid cluttering the screen and make things possibly a bit more balanced.
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Because even without a ridiculous single summon limit, 5e necromancers are already the weakest wizard specialization. If Larian wanna a single summon limit, honestly, just REMOVE THE SUBCLASS. Is less awful than having a class that only serves to cause frustration on the fans of thta subclass.

And so far you have litteraly no idea how Larian will implement them ...
Didnt people say simmilar thing about Ranger? It seem quite powerfull to me. laugh
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
It's not necessarily a bad thing to just get one summon if that creature is powerful, imo. I mean sure, it's nice to swarm enemies with lots of cannon fodder type summons, I guess, but... I am quite fine with summoning one powerful bastard instead to avoid cluttering the screen and make things possibly a bit more balanced.


Wrong. Read what I said about balance above

"1 - In a SP game, FUN > Balance.
2 - A lot of D&D games din't had this BS. BG1/2 had a lot of powerful summons.
3 - Consistency in mechanics and lore >>>> balance. And a necromancer unable to control two undeads makes ZERO sense.
4 - Balance is subjective. Some people complain about bolt action rifles and shotguns on BF1, literally the less used weapons in the game and the weapons which people should use the most in a WW1 scenario.
5 - D&D was never balanced, except 4e which is the worst edition by far.

And even 4e, WoTC prefered to not include necromancy for the sake of the balance dogma than including a USELESS SINGLE summon limit on 4e. 4e was awful but at least they din't included an SUB class that serves to nothing but to cause frustration among the class fans."

This is summoning on kingmaker and yes, you can shapeshift into a silver dragon

[Linked Image]

Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
[
And so far you have litteraly no idea how Larian will implement them ...
Didnt people say simmilar thing about Ranger? It seem quite powerfull to me. laugh


Because seems trashier than the P&P while range is better than P&P.
BG1 = Multiple summons
BG2 = Summon cap = 5 and people HATED it
BG3 = Single summon????
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
BG1 = Multiple summons
BG2 = Summon cap = 5 and people HATED it
BG3 = Single summon????

*cries in druidic*
Originally Posted by LukasPrism
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
BG1 = Multiple summons
BG2 = Summon cap = 5 and people HATED it
BG3 = Single summon????

*cries in druidic*



Cries in Abyssal.

Seriously. All, I REPEAT, ALL popular necromancer characters in fiction has armies and armies of created undead at his disposal. Single summon limit kills the fantasy of being a necromancer so much that serves only to cause frustration to the fans of necromancers.
Fun fact 1: The game is in Early Access.
Fun fact 2: You cannot normally access level 5.
Fun fact 3: A shitton of class features and systems are not yet implemented, never mind working properly.

By all means, feel free to offer suggestions to Larian about how you would like to see the game work. That's fine and good. But perhaps take fun facts 1-3 into consideration before jumping to conclusions. There is perhaps a connection between fun facts 1, 2, and 3.
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Fun fact 1: The game is in Early Access.
Fun fact 2: You cannot normally access level 5.
Fun fact 3: A shitton of class features and systems are not yet implemented, never mind working properly.

By all means, feel free to offer suggestions to Larian about how you would like to see the game work. That's fine and good. But perhaps take fun facts 1-3 into consideration before jumping to conclusions. There is perhaps a connection between fun facts 1, 2, and 3.


Fun fact 1 : You cannot have a mage hand and a familiar at the same time
Fun fact 2 : Larian already did everything that they could to destroy casters in BG3. HP bloat, spell nerfs, ultra limited max level...
Fun fact 3 : Larian never had a game with good necromancy

Larian has a LOT of resources. If they din't allowed us to see the tier 3+ spells is cuz they are debating if they will """balance""" or not(read : Balance = Ruin and force everyone who wanna a more P&P experience to use a mod like spell fixes for nwn2)
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor

Fun fact 1 : You cannot have a mage hand and a familiar at the same time


Yes, and that's a problem which should be fixed. Along with mage hand working exactly the opposite of the rules as written in every way. It does not mean that it is the final version of Mage Hand, because this is not the final version of the game.


Quote
Fun fact 2 : Larian already did everything that they could to destroy casters in BG3. HP bloat, spell nerfs, ultra limited max level...


That's not a fact, that's you making an baseless assumption of malicious intent, and calling it a fact.


Quote
Fun fact 3 : Larian never had a game with good necromancy


That's not a fact, that's you taking your opinion about what good necromancy is and asserting it as a fact.


Quote

Larian has a LOT of resources. If they din't allowed us to see the tier 3+ spells is cuz they are debating if they will """balance""" or not(read : Balance = Ruin and force everyone who wanna a more P&P experience to use a mod like spell fixes for nwn2)


This is more baseless assumptions of malicious intent.
I guess they could remove necromancers...
Since some spells say that you can summon several several creatures at once and not all summon spells require concentration there schould be no limit of having only 1 summon at a time.
So yes, a wizard should be able to have a familiar, animate dead and one other conjuration spell active at a time.

That being said I agree with Stabby: Its too early to know things for sure.
- Max lv is 4, so we cannot have animate dead at the moment, or any other spell with several summons.
- The necromancer subclass is not implemented yet and it would be pointless because we cannot get animate dead anyway.
- Animate dead is the only spell that lets us summon undead. You only summon weak zombies or skelletons and it is considered evil so every non evil NPC (and maybe some evil ones too) would attack you if you go to town with a zombie army.
- The concentration mechanic was added to prevent things like your kingmaker screenshot and endless pre buffing. Some people may not like it, but thats a fundamental rule of 5E.
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor

Clerics on D&D aren't healers like in a mmo.

They are representatives of a deity in the material plane. D&D is not the generic mmo about gear farming and cooldown managing. The spell system for eg, is based on literature(Jack Vance). And necromancers are a wizard specialization, you have evokers, abjurers, conjurers, illusionists(...) 5e already has the weakest necromancy on D&D franchise, with a single summon limit, there are no reason to even have it on the game.


So Clerics are basically "John Wick's" for their Deitys huh?
Well - I truly didn't knew that. And it feels very wierd just the same.

There was always a fine line of distinction between a user of Holy Abilitys and well, yeah... UNDEAD UNHOLY ABILITYS. grin
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?! ^_^
NECROTIC HANDS?!
A TOTALLY EVIL SOUNDING SPELL!! laugh
THIS IS NORMAL? laugh
FOR CLERICS?! ^_^

Why destroy the Unholy for your Deity if you can become the user of the Unholy? Makes no sense to me.
But I somehow matches our current real world political climate. So much hypocrisy!
( Not going fully there though. )
I expected something different when my Cleric represented Selune just for the luls to piss of Shadowheart. And she took it way more easily as I expected.

The gods can suck d... -evil then. LoL
After factchecking this piece of shame called Kelemvor I feel like Devils are the better deal anyways.
This mofo imprisons people because they lived freely without SIMPING to a god.

Ok, its war.
Peace was never an option.
(LoL)
Originally Posted by JustAnotherBaldu


The gods can suck d... -evil then. LoL
After factchecking this piece of shame called Kelemvor I feel like Devils are the better deal anyways.
This mofo imprisons people because they lived freely without SIMPING to a god.

Ok, its war.
Peace was never an option.
(LoL)


I suggest you try Nwn 2 mask of the betrayer. The entire campaign is based around that "worship a deity or your soul is doomed". smile

Deities in D&D are not all benevolent and nice, this isn't christianity, so it's not abnormal for a Cleric of an evil deity to be a punisher and not a healer.
Originally Posted by Madscientist
Since some spells say that you can summon several several creatures at once and not all summon spells require concentration there schould be no limit of having only 1 summon at a time.
So yes, a wizard should be able to have a familiar, animate dead and one other conjuration spell active at a time.

That being said I agree with Stabby: Its too early to know things for sure.
- Max lv is 4, so we cannot have animate dead at the moment, or any other spell with several summons.
- The necromancer subclass is not implemented yet and it would be pointless because we cannot get animate dead anyway.
- Animate dead is the only spell that lets us summon undead. You only summon weak zombies or skelletons and it is considered evil so every non evil NPC (and maybe some evil ones too) would attack you if you go to town with a zombie army.
- The concentration mechanic was added to prevent things like your kingmaker screenshot and endless pre buffing. Some people may not like it, but thats a fundamental rule of 5E.



this. Buffing for 1mn before every fight was really tedious.

Originally Posted by Umsche

Deities in D&D are not all benevolent and nice, this isn't christianity, so it's not abnormal for a Cleric of an evil deity to be a punisher and not a healer.


I didnt knew Selune was such a b°tch in disguise though.
Or Mystra. Or Eilistrae.
I bet their Clerics can use Necrotic Hands too.

Why not give them
° Torture the Heretics
and
° "F*ck you Mortals" grin

as spells of the 5th Tier or something?! >snort
Originally Posted by JustAnotherBaldu

Originally Posted by Umsche

Deities in D&D are not all benevolent and nice, this isn't christianity, so it's not abnormal for a Cleric of an evil deity to be a punisher and not a healer.


I didnt knew Selune was such a b°tch in disguise though.
Or Mystra. Or Eilistrae.
I bet their Clerics can use Necrotic Hands too.

Why not give them
° Torture the Heretics
and
° "F*ck you Mortals" grin

as spells of the 5th Tier or something?! >snort


Yep, even good gods allow you to inflict wounds (that's the real name of that spell) to your ennemies.

Necromancy is not viewed as evil per default. For example raise dead and resurection are both necromancy spells.

I guess this is your "Torture the Heretics" spell : https://www.aidedd.org/dnd/sorts.php?vo=harm


Originally Posted by Stabbey

That's not a fact, that's you making an baseless assumption of malicious intent, and calling it a fact.


Nope. that is a fact. Larian did this awful "high HP/lower AC" rule without considering how it affect spells like sleep and color spray


Originally Posted by Stabbey

That's not a fact, that's you taking your opinion about what good necromancy is and asserting it as a fact.


Is not my opinion. Cheb Gonaz has a channel ONLY about necromancy and he agrees with me.




Originally Posted by Umsche
I guess they could remove necromancers...



Better than having a ultra nerfed one that serves only to cause frustration on necro fans.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBaldu


So Clerics are basically "John Wick's" for their Deitys huh?




Not "John Wick's" but a cleric of a evil deity do get some evil nasty powers. A cleric of Talos do get some nasty elemental powers.

Vecna on realms of dread for eg, prohibited the use of magic for anyone but his priests and he is the unique dark lord who ever escaped an realm of dread.
© Larian Studios forums