I like the idea of a single entity. A pet or summoned creature. I hate the idea of a "swarm of zombies" or "swarm of skeletons"  It creates a dissonance in my mind that breaks the enjoyment of the game. Sure, I get it, it is a representation of a mass of undead. But other than 'that is just how it works' why are all my undead clumped together and unable to move independently?

The size of a swarm also causes issues.  A swarm of tiny creatures works because they are tiny and take up less space so a 10' swarm makes sense. A 10' swarm of zombies doesn't and if you make it bigger than that, then it becomes so unwieldy to fit anywhere that it becomes useless.

A single creature under the Necromancer's control that can be buffed or an emanation of spirits works best in my opinion. If we can't have that, then I prefer what has been presented in this UA.

Quote from Lia_Black >>

I like the idea of a single entity. A pet or summoned creature. I hate the idea of a "swarm of zombies" or "swarm of skeletons"  It creates a dissonance in my mind that breaks the enjoyment of the game. Sure, I get it, it is a representation of a mass of undead. But other than 'that is just how it works' why are all my undead clumped together and unable to move independently?

Because they're being controlled by a single necromancer and don't have free will?

Honestly, I would make it so commanding a pet (any pet) costs you a bonus action, and you can give the same identical command to multiple pets, but you cannot give them individual orders without additional actions. Or if you want minimal changes to existing rules, don't set an action cost but do state that you can only give one command per turn.

Necromancer seems like the perfect opportunity to codify some sort of minion rules for 5e

There is some good and bad in there.

Conjuration seems a bit insane, gets an ability to give all summons temp hit points and resistance to everything and then can summon 2 at once but at 1/2 hit points. Those summons are crazy powerful 2 of them would be insane and with resistance and temp hit points each is more powerful than anyone else's summons.  

Necromancer, i don't want that many things on the field, maybe the swarm idea im seeing in this thread is a good idea. I am glad they got rid of the dominate any undead power, that was super OP. 

Enchanter: I like moving back towards 2014 abilities, but the once per long rest or use a spell limit all over the place is lame imo as the abilities are not as good as a 1st level spell. luckily its just cast, not burn but still. Instinctive charm was niche as a 6th level ability, making it worse and 10th is not a great choice.(at least the work on people immune to charm so that is good, but have have it work against all the creatures attacks that round at least otherwise shield is far better almost always) Alter memories, dude stop stop with the always prepared crap. create unique abilities even if they are similar to a spell. The old alter memories was far better. 

Transmuter, nah don't make them better at wild shape than the druid. But hey lets go with giant ape.....  seriously limit it to cr creatures 1/4 wizard level or something 

Still overall I think most the ideas are okay, just needs some tuning. I do wish they had thrown in some warlock ones, as warlock needs the most love out of the arcane casters imo. Though I think they need more invocation support and more spells they can access even if they gatekeep it with pact of the tome. 

I think the Arcane Archer still needs a little bit of tweaking, but it is close.

The Tattooed Monk could have ALL options at every level outside of the capstone and it would still be the weakest subclass.  Not the weakest Monk subclass, the weakest subclass for any class in 2024, and it isn't even close.

The first 3 Wizard classes seem good, although the Necromancer could be group breaking just based on how much time it could take up at the table.  Definitely not something that a regularly unprepared player should be using.

I didn't get a good read on the Transmuter, as that was surprisingly never one of the options I was ever intrigued by in any edition. 

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Necromancy Wizard is a great example of when Wizards should ignore the playtesters.  As a subclass, it encourages large swarms of zombies - you abilities have a greater effect the more you have on the field.

This is certainly flavorful, and I can see the appeal of having a large swarm of undead.  It also makes for terrible gameplay in D&D.  Slower turns while rolling a large number of additional creature’s attacks, doing their movement, etc.  Positioning issues for both the DM and party as the field is taken up with undead.  Animate Dead already has the propensity to make the game worse for the entire table, an entire subclass around it is a mistake.

I would have much rather seen something like the Amass keyword in Magic the Gathering - something that allows you to build a single, increasingly powerful creature (let’s call if a swarm of souls or something).  Perhaps even one that changes size categories to represent a hoard every, say, 5 monsters added.  But something that does all its action and movement as a singular, reducing the fundamental problems with the hoard-favoring, table punishing Animate Dead.

 I think it's a self-solving problem - namely that Animate Dead will fall off quite hard as the wizard goes up in level, and the entourage will drop to being flavor or at best explosion-fodder, while their true minion will be the Summon Undead. People seem to want the fantasy of having a bunch of skeletons walk around behind them moreso than an actual functioning army.

Quote from PsyrenXY >>

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Necromancy Wizard is a great example of when Wizards should ignore the playtesters.  As a subclass, it encourages large swarms of zombies - you abilities have a greater effect the more you have on the field.

This is certainly flavorful, and I can see the appeal of having a large swarm of undead.  It also makes for terrible gameplay in D&D.  Slower turns while rolling a large number of additional creature’s attacks, doing their movement, etc.  Positioning issues for both the DM and party as the field is taken up with undead.  Animate Dead already has the propensity to make the game worse for the entire table, an entire subclass around it is a mistake.

I would have much rather seen something like the Amass keyword in Magic the Gathering - something that allows you to build a single, increasingly powerful creature (let’s call if a swarm of souls or something).  Perhaps even one that changes size categories to represent a hoard every, say, 5 monsters added.  But something that does all its action and movement as a singular, reducing the fundamental problems with the hoard-favoring, table punishing Animate Dead.

 I think it's a self-solving problem - namely that Animate Dead will fall off quite hard as the wizard goes up in level, and the entourage will drop to being flavor or at best explosion-fodder, while their true minion will be the Summon Undead. People seem to want the fantasy of having a bunch of skeletons walk around behind them moreso than an actual functioning army.

 Danse Macabre & Create Undead need to be updated to support this Necromancer ASAP.

Or they can just, you know....release the Valda's version for Halloween. This Necromancer UA is like a hybrid of that w/a Wizard.

Quote from PsyrenXY >>

 I think it's a self-solving problem - namely that Animate Dead will fall off quite hard as the wizard goes up in level, and the entourage will drop to being flavor or at best explosion-fodder, while their true minion will be the Summon Undead.

 Animate Dead doesn't fall off that fast, swarms of skeletons remain reasonably effective well into tier 3 unless the DM just decides to make them nonviable.