Talk:Necromancer - Revision history

Ion frigate: /* Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction */

2010-03-10T02:13:54Z

‎Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction

Elven2006: /* Intrinsic Robe of Power effect? */

2010-03-10T00:28:37Z

‎Intrinsic Robe of Power effect?

Elven2006: /* Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction */ new section

2010-03-10T00:25:04Z

‎Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction: new section

MrFroon: /* Intrinsic Robe of Power effect? */ new section

2009-10-14T07:05:25Z

‎Intrinsic Robe of Power effect?: new section

64.185.146.160 at 06:57, 5 March 2009

2009-03-05T06:57:53Z

Loof42 at 15:07, 8 January 2009

2009-01-08T15:07:45Z

Loof42 at 15:07, 8 January 2009

2009-01-08T15:07:22Z

Petzl: New page: In "Of Weapon and Spell Skills" it recommends abandoning the quarterstaff (1d6) for dagger or mattock. mattocks (1d12), i understand but why waste proficiency slots on daggers (1d4) ? --~...

2009-01-08T01:59:07Z

New page: In "Of Weapon and Spell Skills" it recommends abandoning the quarterstaff (1d6) for dagger or mattock. mattocks (1d12), i understand but why waste proficiency slots on daggers (1d4) ? --~...

New page

In "Of Weapon and Spell Skills" it recommends abandoning the quarterstaff (1d6)
for dagger or mattock. mattocks (1d12), i understand but why waste proficiency
slots on daggers (1d4) ?
--[[User:Petzl|Petzl]] 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:13, 10 March 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Sorry, but i have no other way of posting this, as the spellbook in question has no page. I was playing as a necromancer, and summon a Nazgul. since i dominated him, i thought, "Hey, why not two?" I ended up with 11 when I relized something was wrong. There are only nine. So, Someone should check to see if this does the same for other creatures and post it for the rest of us plz. [[User:Elven2006\|Elven2006]] 00:25, March 10, 2010 (UTC)		Sorry, but i have no other way of posting this, as the spellbook in question has no page. I was playing as a necromancer, and summon a Nazgul. since i dominated him, i thought, "Hey, why not two?" I ended up with 11 when I relized something was wrong. There are only nine. So, Someone should check to see if this does the same for other creatures and post it for the rest of us plz. [[User:Elven2006\|Elven2006]] 00:25, March 10, 2010 (UTC)
		+	:Doesn't surprise me; a lot of actions don't respect extinction. For example, [[summon nasties]] doesn't, as otherwise nasties could be reasonably quickly extincted, rendering the spell harmless. Also, pudding division doesn't, which is why [[pudding farming]] is so effective. Particularly in SLASH'EM it seems, a lot of the new ways of generating monsters don't respect extinction. For example, one of the gypsy cards summons an [[Erinys]], which are supposed to be extincted after three have been generated. I think I summoned something like 9 in one game, as I was spamming gypsies for the wishes. So yeah, the spellbook of summon undead probably doesn't respect extinction; kinda breaks the mythos a little when it comes to Nazgul, but oh well... -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 02:13, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?[[User:MrFroon|MrFroon]] 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 == Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction ==
 Sorry, but i have no other way of posting this, as the spellbook in question has no page. I was playing as a necromancer, and summon a Nazgul. since i dominated him, i thought, "Hey, why not two?" I ended up with 11 when I relized something was wrong. There are only nine. So, Someone should check to see if this does the same for other creatures and post it for the rest of us plz. [[User:Elven2006|Elven2006]] 00:25, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:25, 10 March 2010
Line 13:		Line 13:

	It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?[[User:MrFroon\|MrFroon]] 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)		It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?[[User:MrFroon\|MrFroon]] 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Spellbook of summon undead breaks extiction ==
		+
		+	Sorry, but i have no other way of posting this, as the spellbook in question has no page. I was playing as a necromancer, and summon a Nazgul. since i dominated him, i thought, "Hey, why not two?" I ended up with 11 when I relized something was wrong. There are only nine. So, Someone should check to see if this does the same for other creatures and post it for the rest of us plz. [[User:Elven2006\|Elven2006]] 00:25, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:05, 14 October 2009
Line 9:		Line 9:

	[[Special:Contributions/64.185.146.160\|64.185.146.160]] 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)		[[Special:Contributions/64.185.146.160\|64.185.146.160]] 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Intrinsic Robe of Power effect? ==
		+
		+	It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?[[User:MrFroon\|MrFroon]] 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:57, 5 March 2009
Line 5:		Line 5:

	Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers. [[User:Loof42\|Loof42]] 15:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)		Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers. [[User:Loof42\|Loof42]] 15:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	Yes, but the odds of finding a +1 or better dagger early in the game are slim. In my opinion it's worth using the enchanted quarterstaff until your first artifact weapon.
		+
		+	[[Special:Contributions/64.185.146.160\|64.185.146.160]] 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:07, 8 January 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:
	--[[User:Petzl\|Petzl]] 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)		--[[User:Petzl\|Petzl]] 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

−	Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers.	+	Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers. [[User:Loof42\|Loof42]] 15:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:07, 8 January 2009
Line 3:		Line 3:
	slots on daggers (1d4) ?		slots on daggers (1d4) ?
	--[[User:Petzl\|Petzl]] 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)		--[[User:Petzl\|Petzl]] 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers.