Best necromancy/skeletons in RPGs

[Harry Easter]

White and Black Necromany in Arcanum, because they:

1) Feel both very distinct and build upon each other.

2) Have ties to the mainplot (especially Black Necromancy)

3) The Talk with ghost spell is still awesome and can also give you hints and new oppurtunities in the story. I mean, you can just kill an anoying elf and summon his ghost and THEN he will give you the informations you need, how cool ist that?

 

[unfairlight]

I liked how in Gothic 2 you could summon however much you wanted. Once I got the Goblin Skeleton spell I could kill the Black Troll by just summoning, drinking mana potions and then summoning some more. It's not proper necromancy per se but still fun to look at those annoying little things just rush to their deaths.

 

[Cryomancer]

I liked how in Gothic 2 you could summon however much you wanted. Once I got the Goblin Skeleton spell I could kill the Black Troll by just summoning, drinking mana potions and then summoning some more. It's not proper necromancy per se but still fun to look at those annoying little things just rush to their deaths.

On Gothic 1 summoning was far better. I mean, summon skeleton Summons 2 Skeletons and 1 Skeleton Warrior and costs only 10 mana. But the same applies to enemies. Skeleton mages uses this spell and if you don't kill then quickly, you will be facing a undead army soon. My G1 mage

 

[unfairlight]

I didn't play as a mage in Gothic 1, so I wouldn't know.

 

[Cryomancer]

I didn't play as a mage in Gothic 1, so I wouldn't know.

You should try. Magicians are far more powerful on G1 and if you wanna be a hybrid, on Swamp Camp, you can become a templar(not a Guru unfortnetly), it locks you to circle 4 but death to undead, Storm of Fire and other amazing spells are circle 4. IMO Templar as a hybrid class is far better than the G2's Paladin in theme, cool factor and mechanics. My first G1 run was as a Templar and i loved. Even i who is very magefag and sucks on melee was having a good time on melee on G1...

 

[Galdred]

Another aspect I find interesting in necromancy is the will of the undead:
That is why I like "higher level" undead (vampires, lich, revenants, ...):
They retain some personality while hordes of zombies/skeletons are functionaly the same as golems.

 

[Cryomancer]

That is why I like "higher level" undead (vampires, lich, revenants, ...):

Vampires depends a lot on setting. For eg, a lower gen vampire can dominate a higher gen vampire easily on WoD and make him do his bidding. In other settings, vampires lose the empathy. In other settings, vampires are good, love insecure teenager girls and sparkle on sun. On D&D, you have vampire and vampire spawns. Weak PC/NPCs who become "infected" by vampirism but are too weak to become a fully fledged vampire become a vampire spawn, without any will of his own, bounded by his master's will, but losing control over intelligent undead is far more dangerous than lo unintelligent undead

--------------------------

And one more thing. Necromancy should't be just animating the dead. Animate the dead is a crucial part of necromancy, but necromancers should know a little of more basic magic, know conjuration, alchemy, be able to put curses in the enemies, use enemy lifeforce against themselves, channel deadly unnatural energies, deadly poisons and etc. Reduce necromancy to just animating the dead is like reducing a fire magician to only hurling fireballs and gothic 1 IMO has one of the best magic ever by far. Teleport, Possess the enemy bodies(Control), Freeze enemies, manipulate objects at range(Telekinesis), charm enemies, knock down enemies with strong wind(Fist of Wind), create light, put enemies to sleep, fear enemies, summon undead, demons and golems, shapeshift into a lot of creatures, from a tiny Meatbug to a shadowbeast, etc. If you become a fire magician on old camp, there are runes and scrolls to have all of this options.

If anyone is needing a incentive to play G1 as a mage

 

[laclongquan]

Books? And mostly arcane books?

And how does the nobility happen to have them and not the mages in the first place?

Nobility will have access to arcane arts in most situations where magic is powerful and accessible.

It's the other way around - on a world with powerful and accessible magic, muggles would have absolutely zero chance to rise to nobility in the first place. Unless they prefer to keep their existence secret from muggles - which is more or less the scenario I was arguing for, mages as free agents unconstrained by the rules of the muggle world (because where's fun in ruling an empire when you could be busy unraveling the universe?).
There are no scenarios where it makes sense for powerful mages to serve infinitely inferior muggles.

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.
The bastard will have half their genes coming from their parents. So they can have access to all the advantages the nobles have, gene-wise.
They are going to be smart. They are going to have access to magic thanks to blood (sorcerers equivalent)
More importantly, the lower classes are no fools and going to treasures to the bastards for their abilities. They are going to center around the bastards in order to create resistance.
And their absolute number is going to be huge, several orders bigger than the nobles.
There's going to have revolts with bastards being aces in the hole. Whenever the bastards achieve certain numbers and the lower classes think they have a chance to revolt successfully. REVOLTS!
Several times. Like clockworks.
The old nobles will go down.
Sure, the bastards are going to get their own share of the spoils.
But the other lower classes will have their own chance to rise up to.

 

[V_K]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

 

[Whimper]

Necromancy = turning the dead into your servants.

I mean, technically, historically, it's a form of divination based on contacting the dead. Raising the dead as servants isn't even a properly Western practice.

In Hrólfs saga kraka, the princess Skuld was almost invincible in battle. When her warriors fell she cast magic to make them rise again to continue fighting.
I'm pretty sure that there are other examples of old European folklore of people raising the dead to do their bidding.

 

[Cryomancer]

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

He could be drunk. Also, IRL condom exists and there are millionaires spending fortunes in child support

 

[V_K]

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

He could be drunk. Also, IRL condom exists and there are millionaires spending fortunes in child support

Magic is far more reliable than condoms. Besides, abortion and infanticide are also much easier and clandestine with magic.
Or a mage could do the opposite, and keep themselves under an infertility spell at all times except when trying to conceive.

 

[Storyfag]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

 

[V_K]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

Even ancient Egyptians had the concept of contraception.
Magic - and particularly necromancy - would also speed up the development of natural science considerably.

 

[Storyfag]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

Even ancient Egyptians had the concept of contraception.
Magic - and particularly necromancy - would also speed up the development of natural science considerably.

Not saying it couldn't - indeed, there are settings where it definitely did. But there are settings where it didn't. Not all things need be universal.

 

[JarlFrank]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

Because Ed Greenwood is a horny geek

 

[what am i doing]

Cultist Simulator

Seconding this. I think the one main issue though with reanimating bodies in Cultist Simulator is that you get the required rites at a point when you can already summon Mansus spirits, which are more powerful. They give you Map's Edge and Sunset super early (which can't use bodies to create Risen), and those are also the best rites for most of the game, and the ones you'll use for most situations. Then by the time you actually get rites that use bodies, like Crow's Quenching, Mother's Mercy, or Sea's Fasting, you don't want to summon Risen anyways because you can get summons that do the same jobs better, like Caligines and Maids in the Mirror.

In my opinion they should have set up book acquisition so that Risen are some of the first minions you summon (requiring dead bodies and notoriety) and then you get the better rites later in the game.

The three positives for Risen in the late game though is that they have no rebellion risk, can have their timers renewed, and can be used to dispose of bodies since they don't give notoriety when they expire. So I guess they do have a tiny niche.

 

[Galdred]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

Actually, if from a "noble" lineage, getting bastards is certainly something you want to avoid, as it can weaken your position, or the position of your inheritors.
Having legitimate children is another story, as you really want a son to suceed you, but you don't really want too many reaching adulthood, because you would need to do something with them, as you are usually not supposed to share your heritage.
So the number of children is a complicated question: it both helps secure the bloodline by giving "redundancy", but it also can be a risk (infighting, decline of the status of the cadet branches, and so on).

 

[Cryomancer]

Yes Galdred. I believe that a necromancer would have a similar "dilemma" with intelligent undead. Imagine a Elder Lich, having some intelligent undead, vampires for eg controlling the army can help a lot BUT what if one of then or a couple of then decides to try to take your position? As for unintelligent undead, skeletons doesn't need to be in humanoid form with a shield and axe, in fact, look to Wheel Skeletons from Dark Souls. Now imagine a carriage carrying and protecting skeleton mages who once is destroyed, the skeleton wheels goes rampage...

https://darksouls.wiki.fextralife.com/Wheel+Skeleton

 

[laclongquan]

Wrong!
Let's assume your scenario: nobles have access to magic and try all their damnednessdest to keep monopoly.
There's a uncertain factor: nobles' bastards. The bastards are practically a given. Because the nobles will put their paws on the female servants and lower class but NOT acknowledging their offspring. That's how they keep the nobility class size small (in order to keep their quality of life high). So there's going to have bastards.

Why on earth wouldn't a mage noble fucking a muggle servant just cast a little spell to prevent conception?

Why would a medieval setting even entertain the concept of contraception?

Actually, if from a "noble" lineage, getting bastards is certainly something you want to avoid, as it can weaken your position, or the position of your inheritors.
Having legitimate children is another story, as you really want a son to suceed you, but you don't really want too many reaching adulthood, because you would need to do something with them, as you are usually not supposed to share your heritage.
So the number of children is a complicated question: it both helps secure the bloodline by giving "redundancy", but it also can be a risk (infighting, decline of the status of the cadet branches, and so on).

No, what you said work generally with non-mage nobility. It wont work with mage nobility because the foundations simply differed.

Non-mage nobility basis of wealth based on lands, and possessions (walking or stationary). Thus if they are shared among many children, they will weaken upon successive generations. Thus they have some motives to concentrate wealth on ONE inheritors.

Mage nobility based of wealth based on that, AND more importantly on magic skills and knowledge, the very definition of mage-noble. Without magic they are just muggle nobles, cattle to mage-noble based on our setting in this thread (pyramid with mages on top).

And skills and knowledge is not something diluted upon many inheritors. Even if you set up something like blood-foundation magic for example, knowledge wont be affted by that. The more skilled mages you have, the more strength your nobility lineage have. And the only limit is that you dont want to expand your noble class size too much to keep your quality of life high. Thus you limit education to your acknowledged children.

And therefore your bastards can just... spread across the lands for all the mage-nobles care. Contraception is not an issue they keep in mind.

 

[Galdred]

Indeed, I was refering to standard nobility. You are right that noble mages would not have such issues at all, unless magic power is tied to the land (as in the Birthright campaign setting), or magic artifacts.

 

[laclongquan]

In case of magic bound to the land, if the mage nobles can not control who the magic coming to, it's all the reason to spread seeds wild and far, wait for the acknowledged heir to the land appear, then denoble all the rest of the children. The non-heir children can be turned into middle class citizens who can get magic education.

If the mage nobles can control who will be the heir of the land, then even more reason NOT to care about spreading seeds far and wild.

Same course of action with magic artifacts.

Mage nobles, simply speaking, has no motive at all about contraception.

 

[V_K]

Mage nobles, simply speaking, has no motive at all about contraception.

You gave the motive in your original post - if there's a risk that non-legitimate children inherit the powers then there's a reason not to make them. Especially given that magical contraception methods don't have any of the disadvantages condoms have.
There's also a very obvious motive for contraception for female mages.

But then again, I also don't agree with this:

you dont want to expand your noble class size too much to keep your quality of life high

Because you can just use magic to increase your quality of life indefinitely.

 

[what am i doing]

Because you can just use magic to increase your quality of life indefinitely.

This depends on the magic system in question.

 

[V_K]

Because you can just use magic to increase your quality of life indefinitely.

This depends on the magic system in question.

As do many other things. But we're presumably talking high fantasy magic, which implies capability of god-level feats. Weak magic, or very costly magic would create different kinds of societies, of course.