Quote from: TristramEvans;793307Magic!

Charisma?

Oh wait... Friendship IS magic. Silly me...

You guys can re-name it Nice-romancy, then have a group hug on tbp. To me, the evil aspect is more appealing.

Evil! EEEEVIL!

Quote from: dragoner;793337You guys can re-name it Nice-romancy, then have a group hug on tbp. To me, the evil aspect is more appealing.

Evil Necromancy is so 80s. Get with the times! Embrace your inner Casper. Or outer Casper as the case may be.

Quote from: Omega;793341Evil Necromancy is so 80s. Get with the times! Embrace your inner Casper. Or outer Casper as the case may be.

Because orcs and drow are problematic. Maybe things don't need to be sanitized for the protection of hippies. /shrug

Quote from: dragoner;793343Because orcs and drow are problematic. Maybe things don't need to be sanitized for the protection of hippies. /shrug

AD&D had bard liches you know...

Quote from: dragoner;793337You guys can re-name it Nice-romancy, then have a group hug on tbp. To me, the evil aspect is more appealing.

I like having both.
A well buttressed reason for having some less evil, more useful folk who can help free the soul, as well as dead evil ones that use their ability to enslave the souls of the dead.

Quote from: Omega;793271Thought he just said "Hey. You guys screwed up long ago. Want to make up for it now?" and when asked afterwards if their debt was paid he said "sure" rather than using that debt as a chain?

The Dunharrow spirits were resentful at best of being used, rather than being totally willing. They agreed because they were cursed, not necessarily because they were genuinely remorseful. I would say Aragorn used the debt as a chain to get them to fight in the first place, but he was respectful and broke the chain after the battle.

My point is just that many people would say that having an undead army fight for you is inherently evil - but the example of Aragorn is counter to that. I would say what matters for the morality is treating the dead respectfully, not the mechanics of how you raise them.

One thing I keep contemplating, in gaming, is the role of magic in real beliefs/traditions.

In modern fantasy, magic tends to be a discrete THING that you have points in, a powersource that operates in a weird way, etc.

But typically, the only 'unique' thing about a mage, in real beliefs, was happening to know the right recipes and techniques to get spirits to show up or convince the Powers Wot Be that they should intervene on your behalf.

I mention that because necromancy and summoning and seers is a much more fluid thing, and while someone might be a respected seer, desperate people or wise old grannies might also know a thing or two about whistling up a spirit down by the fen.


Basically, anything that allows magic like Ladyhawke is cool in my book.

Quote from: Omega;793375AD&D had bard liches you know...

[obscure reference]"My name is Mokk, thanks alot..." [/obscure reference]

Quote from: dragoner;793337You guys can re-name it Nice-romancy, then have a group hug on tbp. To me, the evil aspect is more appealing.

Yeah, well, what I find appealing is folks avoiding threadcrapping by those who can't handle that not every gamer out there buys into their 1980s G-vs-E-only attitude.  Don't worry, sport, there's no shortage of "OMG but the dead are ICKY!!!!!" gamers out there for you to hug instead.

Necromancy as Lawful!

'My apologies, Mr. Franks, you expired three years before your contract was fulfilled. As noted in subclause N3, you have been animated to serve out the remainder...'

Quote from: Ravenswing;793493Yeah, well, what I find appealing is folks avoiding threadcrapping by those who can't handle that not every gamer out there buys into their 1980s G-vs-E-only attitude.  Don't worry, sport, there's no shortage of "OMG but the dead are ICKY!!!!!" gamers out there for you to hug instead.

Do you want a genderless gingerbread person to go with those double negatives? So good vs evil is 80's? Now it's the 21st century cliché of how evil is just misunderstood? How boring. No matter how much you rub your crystal, or whatever new age madness you ascribe to, evil will continue to exist. It existed long before the 1980's (not that I have anything against the 80's) and it will continue to exist. I'm sure what you find "OMG ICKY" is having to take a stand for anything; yeah, well, I don't. Which says a hell of a lot about you.

Speaking of the 1980's, I know someone who broke into a mausoleum and kicked the head off a corpse, they were latter arrested and didn't have such a good time in jail. They got what they deserved, imo, and it looks like even the scum in jail felt similar.

Quote from: LordVreeg;793377I like having both.
A well buttressed reason for having some less evil, more useful folk who can help free the soul, as well as dead evil ones that use their ability to enslave the souls of the dead.

You could make a case for evil being used for good, or whatever; however rigid absolutes, I don't know. There is absolution, as well as neutrality, it is sort of playing with a hand grenade, eventually something bad is going to happen. However, in my idea for Kochi, 1503; the Portuguese conquerors are lawful evil, and they would utterly hate necromancers. One would hope there isn't good vs good, but evil has no onus not to be against itself.

Dragoner, are you ever going to acknowledge all the examples of real world belief systems with 'good' necromancy?