D&D 5E Necromancer: Command Undead

[FormerlyHemlock]

The Necromancer is 5E's version of the minionmancer. At 14th level, he gets an ability which looks lackluster at first but actually has some potential: he can make undead creatures friendly and/or take control, if they fail a Cha save, and if they don't have at least Int 12, that command is permanent until he gets a new creature.

My question for y'all: what do you see as the best possible use of this ability? Would you create your own wight via Create Undead and use it to command zombies? Or get your own vampire spawn? Or use it as a disposable slot for taking control of enemy undead at will?

So far the best idea I have is, if you happen to ever meet a mummy lord, to Feeblemind him and then Bestow Curse (Cha saves). He gets one save at +0 and then he's yours forever (hopefully). Mwahahaha! Now you have an undead thug, who is a mid-level cleric spellcaster, immune to normal weapons (but vulnerable to fire), who can attack up to 4 times per round (thanks to legendary actions) for approximately 140 points of damage in addition to paralyzing enemies with his gaze. He also has some interesting legendary actions such as preventing regeneration, blinding enemies, and (most interesting of all) stunning them with a Blasphemous word. (Make sure you plug your own ears with wax first though so you don't get stunned too--so this isn't something you want him doing on the spur of the moment. You have to plan it ahead of time.) His HP are low and he is fragile, but if you just take his heart with you, he conveniently reforms 24 hours after being killed. He is kind of slow (20' movement) but you can Longstrider him to keep up, or even summon him a Phantom Steed.

The reason I'm thinking about this is because I'm building a possible adventure location for my players right now, and there's a mummy lord there as well as some medusas, so naturally my mind turns to "how would I exploit this if I were a PC?" Capturing a pet mummy lord seems, so far, like the best possible use of the Command Undead feature, but there may be others I'm overlooking.

BTW, you want to reverse the Feeblemind after you take control of him, or else he won't be able to understand language or follow your commands. That's why you can't just Feeblemind a Death Tyrant or something and keep it forever--once you take off Feeblemind it goes back to making saving throws every hour to break free (because it's Int 19), but a mummy lord is Int 11 so is perma-controlled.

 

[Mephista]

Honestly, given that NPC undead is firmly within control of the GM, and that there's a high possibility of whomever you take control of will end up dying? I don't think there is a "best possible way." That implies there's some kind of consistancy here.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't mind pets, and in fact I've actually played a necromancer, but I almost never play PCs up to 15th level, so I don't think I'd be much help either. As a DM, mechanically I don't think there's anything preventing what you want to do, but I play with a style of what I call "world accountability". What that means is that the game world reacts to PC actions in a realistic way. In this case, if word ever got out that a PC had a mummy lord (or other undead powerful minion), other powerful NPCs would take note and try to fix that issue. That has created some interesting unplanned adventures in the past

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I don't mind pets, and in fact I've actually played a necromancer, but I almost never play PCs up to 15th level, so I don't think I'd be much help either. As a DM, mechanically I don't think there's anything preventing what you want to do, but I play with a style of what I call "world accountability". What that means is that the game world reacts to PC actions in a realistic way. In this case, if word ever got out that a PC had a mummy lord (or other undead powerful minion), other powerful NPCs would take note and try to fix that issue. That has created some interesting unplanned adventures in the past

My NPCs are generally busy trying to "fix" all kinds of power imbalances (read: every balance not tilted in my favor) already. My game is loosely based on a fantasy wargame called Dominions, so e.g. the scro are prepping for an invasion and the drow are restless about incursions on their border (by PCs actually) and the dragon just wants more treasure income. If the PCs acquire more power, others would take note and maybe try to coopt them, but there wouldn't be any particular eagerness to spend resources against the PCs unless a perception emerged that the PCs were gaining more power than everyone else combined, becoming an existential threat. A mummy lord on your team is just another power increment, like adding another spelljamming ship to your fleet. It's not THAT noteworthy--but if you had a thousand mummy lords and a fleet of a dozen tyrant ships, that would be a threat to everybody which works unite them against you, if they couldn't flee.

That isn't to say that a mummy lord couldn't make the PCs miserable on a much smaller scale. He may be friendly to the necromancer, and he may obey commands, but he's still an ancient powerful murderous NPC who casually rips heads off small children to refresh his memory of human anatomy. You can order him not to hurt anybody, but he still has that mentality, and in any situation NOT covered by orders it may manifest. Including social situations, which may impact your reputation.

To me as a player that sounds like a nightmare but also tremendous fun. As a DM it's just pure fun.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Honestly, given that NPC undead is firmly within control of the GM, and that there's a high possibility of whomever you take control of will end up dying? I don't think there is a "best possible way." That implies there's some kind of consistancy here.

Not an issue for mummy lords, which resurrect automatically. Also not an issue if you create your own with Create Undead.

 

[Mephista]

Not an issue for mummy lords, which resurrect automatically. Also not an issue if you create your own with Create Undead.

The whole point of my post is that you can't suddenly have access to vampires and mummy lords. The GM has to put them into the game first. And, even if you make your own undead, they'll likely be dying in combat, making the whole issue moot. That's like trying to plan out every magic item in the game that your character will get, before you even know if the GM is going to have magic items, or give out random loot, or use pregenerated stuff from an official campaign. You just can't plan for this kind of thing. Too much is out of the player control.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

The whole point of my post is that you can't suddenly have access to vampires and mummy lords. The GM has to put them into the game first. And, even if you make your own undead, they'll likely be dying in combat, making the whole issue moot. That's like trying to plan out every magic item in the game that your character will get, before you even know if the GM is going to have magic items, or give out random loot, or use pregenerated stuff from an official campaign. You just can't plan for this kind of thing. Too much is out of the player control.

Oh, is that what you meant by "under DM control"? Sorry, I thought you meant "functions as a friendly NPC once captured." In that case I'll just say, "I sort of agree." The player can make his own opportunities via Create Undead, but the DM can offer him better opportunities (sometimes inadvertently), and naturally those aren't under his control.

In fact, that is what I asked in my first post: would you prefer to create your own undead, leaving nothing to chance, or to capture high-value targets of opportunity as they arise, or to keep nothing permanently but merely leave the "slot" open for controlling Death Tyrans/Dracoliches/etc. for short periods of time? If going for opportunity targets, which targets would you prioritize over other targets? E.g. if you have a long-term Ghost you're using as an ethereal scout and possessor, and you hear rumors of a vampire infestation nearby, do you think "kill it" or "capture it"? My motivation for wondering about this question is that I built an area with medusas and a mummy lord in it, and realized upon checking the mummy lord's stats that mummy lords are ideal captures for a necromancer. Sure, you could kill it instead without ever realizing the potential, but doing so is kind of like overlooking a major treasure hoard.

So yeah, it's DM dependent, and of course the question isn't about pre-planning which undead you will acquire. That would be absurd in the same way as trying to plan for a fighter to eventually find a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength--if you assume that you'll eventually find one (and you probably won't) and then don't, you'll be up a creek. Finding undead is frankly quite a bit easier in your average D&D game, but finding your ideal undead monster is probably not. (E.g. if you built your whole character concept around finding a mummy lord, and then you met a mummy lord but he had Int 14 instead of 11, you'd be really sad. So don't build the concept around finding a particular undead monster.)

But if you don't plan to see opportunities, you might overlook them.

 

[Hand of Evil]

As a DM, I may rule that any reversal of Feeble-Minded would result in a saving thrown on the control. I base this on the description of the Feeble-Minded spell.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

As a DM, I may rule that any reversal of Feeble-Minded would result in a saving thrown on the control. I base this on the description of the Feeble-Minded spell.

Which part of the description?