Talk:Zombie (5e Class)

Appropriateness as class

Is this really appropriate as a class? Unless you have a wholly undead-focused game or something, being a zombie doesn't seem like a profession or life choice. Is it intended for players to use this, or enemies? If the latter, I think it may be better to create a page detailing progression and advanced features for zombies in general, if the DM's intent is having undead that are threatening to higher-level characters. —Proton^[talk] 10:48, 20 January 2015 (MST)

This is for players who want to be a zombie. 5e doesn't have templates like 3.5e, so I'm trying something similar to the 4e Vampire class. Marasmusine (talk) 12:31, 20 January 2015 (MST)

Precedent: Will Wheaton roleplayed as "Stinky the Zombie" in the PAX 2010 DnD celebrity game [1] :) Marasmusine (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2015 (MST)

i think zombies are better as a race just like the skeleton, just saying. Azernath (talk) 02:37, 21 January 2015 (MST)

What skeleton race?

I made zombie a class so that you can be a zombie dwarf, or a zombie human, or a zombie whatever. Marasmusine (talk) 04:05, 21 January 2015 (MST)

Fifth edition doesn’t outline “templates” like third edition, but I don’t see anything wrong with a similar system as long as players can use it easily, mostly because I don’t think becoming a zombie should necessitate gaining a level. Then you could have a class beyond that, like what you made, which would let zombies specialize in their undeadness a la racial paragon classes. —Proton^[talk] 19:11, 21 January 2015 (MST)

Maybe this should be merged onto the page for the appropriate 5e creature, like the Half-Dragon in the Monster Manual? JPV1000 (talk) 07:53, 22 January 2015 (MST)

I don't think that's allowed, as fifth edition content isn't under a free (as in speech) license, so we technically can't have a zombie page identical to the official one (despite the fact that the info is free (as in beer) in the Basic D&D DMG). —Proton^[talk] 08:20, 22 January 2015 (MST)

The zombie class is for players who want to progress as a zombie, and to become more powerful as a zombie. Or they can take one or two levels of Zombie and then multiclass as they "remember" their old lives.

In 3.5e, wotc eventally published templates as racial classes to make it easier for players to take them. 4e dispensed with templates altogether as demonstrated with the vampire class. I don't want to reintroduce an old mechanic when the class framework works just fine. Marasmusine (talk) 11:48, 22 January 2015 (MST)

The only problems I see with using this as a class is that a) it would consume a level, and b) there's already a mechanic for Were[insert here]'s, Vampires, and Half-Dragons that does this exact thing... (Oh, and Shadow Dragons, but that doesn't happen to PC's at all.)JPV1000 (talk) 12:53, 22 January 2015 (MST)

Yes, that's generally the idea, when you take a class level it consumes a class level. Marasmusine (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2015 (MST)

I get that, but there's already a system in 5e for becoming creatures like zombies.JPV1000 (talk) 16:07, 22 January 2015 (MST)

I must have missed the system for PCs becoming a zombie, where is it? I can see the boxout for "Player Characters as Vampires". In this case, the player becomes almost the same as the creature statblock, they become Lawful Evil, and the DM can take control of the character. Losing individuality, alignment and even control of the character is not a great system for someone who wants to play as a vampire. I predict a vampire class in a future WotC book. Marasmusine (talk) 02:23, 23 January 2015 (MST)

It says the DM *may* take control of the Vampire character, and that's not universally the case for this type of transformation-look at the Half-Dragon, for one. JPV1000 (talk) 17:52, 23 January 2015 (MST)

While the vampire entry has a section on players becoming vampires, I can't see a similar section for half-dragons, so I deduce that it is intended for applying to creatures. While you could give it to a player, giving a PC blindsight, darkvision, damage resistance, a bonus language and a breath weapon "for free" doesn't seem very balanced. If only there was some mechanic for incrementally granting features to a PC! Marasmusine (talk) 03:54, 24 January 2015 (MST)

The skeleton race and zombie class are clear evidence of something that should have been plainly obvious to the developers, especially after 40 effing years, and doubly so with the rampant success of MET in the last 15: Universal Creature Templates. They can be applied to any living thing, they alter it in a balanced way, and their powers change or scale with the creature they're applied to. They don't unbalance anything, they just make yhings more complex for that one creature. Abandoning templates was a stupid idea. Templates weren't hated because they were too complicated, they were hated because the implementation sucked walnuts.--Kydo (talk) 14:55, 5 February 2015 (MST)

I'm afraid I don't know what "MET in the last 15: Universal Creature Templates" is, can you provide a link?

I'm also not sure what a PC with a zombie template would do for a class (none of the PHB classes seem appropriate) Marasmusine (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2015 (MST)

You got lost in the grammar. MET is Minds Eye Theatre. It is, essentially, games like "Vampire: The Masquerade", "Changeling: the Lost", "Werewolf: the Apocalypse", etc.. It has been rapidly growing in popularity for the last 15 years. It and pathfinder are probably D&D's only real market rivals. Its presence should have alerted them to the fact that "human-centric" is nolonger a meaningful assumption in game design. Everything after the colon is what should have been obvious to the game developers. Perhaps I should have made it a new sentence, rather than a run-on...--Kydo (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2015 (MST)

Well, I think this is actually quite functional as a class, an interesting approach to the idea of undead PCs, and it certainly isn't incomplete or lacking in flavor. I'm going to remove that tag if nobody minds. --Kydo (talk) 01:51, 18 July 2015 (MDT)

I like this class save for a few minor details like speed of ten when a regular NPC zombie has a speed of twenty also that there are no skill options especially no intimidate really. that being said i might definitely use this class in the future after some personal tweeks

The base speed is 10 feet slower than normal - so if you're a human zombie your speed is 30 - 10 = 20 feet. If you're a wood elf, your speed is 25 feet. Thanks for trying it out! Marasmusine (talk) 02:39, 10 August 2015 (MDT)

As you don't gain any armor proficiencies wouldn't it be appropriate to give zombie an unarmored class feature?

In terms of defense, I'd like them to be strong in areas other than AC, as I think they should be easy to hit. Undead fortitude helps helps at lower levels). Maybe they should be beefed up somewhere, perhaps a feature that lets them get back up after being dropped to 0 hit points. Marasmusine (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2016 (MST)

Maybe give them advantage on the save, given that they're already atypical for zombies? Then again, that just gives it an element of waiting for your luck to run out, which I'm not sure of. ...Should there be a feature here changing how dropping to 0 HP works? Maybe the zombie could just get back up after X amount of time (in addition to or instead of Undead Fort) unless its body is completely destroyed/it was slain by radiant damage/some kind of purifying spell is cast on it; xd4 rounds where x = (damage dealt / 5), minimum 1? Making Wis (Med) checks to help a zombie survive kinda makes no intuitive sense. Knowlessman (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Those are good ideas, I'll have a think where to put them. Marasmusine (talk) 08:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)