Skeletons and zombies are evil upon creation (arbitrarily)
Skeletons, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Wrights, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creationShadows, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Vampires, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Ghouls, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Gasts, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Pardon me for pointing out the pattern
and golems are neutral upon creation (arbitrarily). It has nothing to do with the actions it performs, especially under the command of someone else.
Perhaps it has something to do with the source then?
or generalizations which urinate in the face of consistency.
Oh no. We've violated the sacred consistency of a mythical world. Surely this requires breaking out the misuse of latin.
You claim that negative energy is evil, which directly violates consistency.
Yes. Otherwise there is no explanation. The OP asked for an explanation.
|
And why on earth is their inherent nature to pointlessly kill life (otherwise known as evil) unless the thing powering them is evil?
Everything in the game setting powered by unnatural energy from the *positive* energy plane is also driven to spend it's entire existence killing and devouring other living things, so, really, what's so great about the alternative?
At least an undead creature can *choose* to not kill to maintain its unnatural otherworldly existence...
What in the game is powered by positive energy?
I wasn't going to get involved, but . . . . it seems like the wrong points are being argued.
In my opinion, animate dead is evil because it desecrates the body of a living creature. It is not about animating what once was a piece of stone or iron as in a golem. It is about creating a thing that is a mockery of the living creature that the body once was. The energies or the rituals used to create undead are not as important as what the actual spell creates: a parody of the once living being.
To me, a druid is an easy example. A druid would and should be offended by most of the examples given in this thread. An animated rat, horse, or whatever, was once a living creature and part of the cycle of life. A zombie or skeleton is the antithesis of a living creature.
A paladin serves the powers of good and law. In my view, gods of law and goodness are also creators or at least protectors of life. IF the paladin serves a god who protects the living, he would surely oppose any disrespectful if not outright blasphemous use of the once living, even if it were once a horse. IF the paladin serves a god who actually created life (a creator god), then he would view all living creatures as his god’s creations. I would expect this type of paladin to be truly offended at the use of corpses in any animated manner.
The problem with that idea is that the spell is is evil, not evil unless the person agreed to have their body made into a skeleton.
In my opinion, animate dead is evil because it desecrates the body of a living creature. It is not about animating what once was a piece of stone or iron as in a golem. It is about creating a thing that is a mockery of the living creature that the body once was. The energies or the rituals used to create undead are not as important as what the actual spell creates: a parody of the once living being.Eating beef - not evil.
Tanning leather - not evil.
Making leather clothing - not evil.
Wearing leather boots until you wear holes in them - not evil
Boiling beef bones for stew - not evil
Cracking beef bones for marrow - not evil
Giving beef bones to dogs - not evil
Taxidermy - not evil
Animating an ox skeleton to pull a cart - evil
I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not. However, I agree with what you wrote. All of the "non-evil" acts listed have nothing to do with animating a corpse.
In the context I listed previously, a druid, paladin, or even a good cleric would take offense at someone animating a carcass to pull a cart; ie making a mockery of the once living creature that was the ox.
And why on earth is their inherent nature to pointlessly kill life (otherwise known as evil) unless the thing powering them is evil?
Why is it that the components of Animate Dead get this amount of in-depth analysis? Do pearls contain knowledge? Do diamonds really contain life force? Is all water divine?
Why is anything in Golarion inherently evil? Orcs and Drow are apparently inherently evil, but it's not like negative energy heals them.
Considering that the 'objective alignment' is based off of Judeo-Christo morality, I'm not surprised that evil things can be created by non-evil things. After all, in that religion there is one creator of everything good or evil. If only evil can beget evil, that would make the creator evil.
There's a lot of things dealing with simplified objective alignment that look weird in different light; Under extensive analyzation and comparison to real world values, objective alignment falls apart.
So are we discussing Necromancy in light of real world subjective morality, or are we discussing Necromancy in the black and white simplified D&D morality?
In D&D morality, orcs, drow, and skeletons evil because well because the bestiary says so. They do evil things and are inherently evil. Paladins can smite them and adventurers can kill them on sight.
BNW, in your games, negative energy is probably synonymous with evil; which is fine and probably makes a lot more sense in the simplified format of evil/good.
The problem with these discussions is that many people keep trying to fit gradient morality into a flat simplified and objective morality system.
Black and white morality is simplified and only really holds ground when it stays simple. If you're asking in-depth questions like this, D&D's simplified 2-dimensional morality is probably not for you.
The problem with that idea is that the spell is is evil, not evil unless the person agreed to have their body made into a skeleton.
Sorry, I don't agree. It seems you're implying that someone who willingly becomes one of the undead is not doing an evil act? Are you saying that one's willingness to be involved in an evil act justifies the act?
Black and white morality is simplified and only really holds ground when it stays simple. If you're asking in-depth questions like this, D&D's simplified 2-dimensional morality is probably not for you.
Grey areas of morality don't exclude black and white area's of morality. Occasionally its nice to have something that is purely, unquestioningly evil so the player can get back into the game of killing things and taking their stuff rather than pontificating on their role in the universe.
Mind you, i LIKE gray areas of morality. I like moral quandaries. That doesn't mean its the only color i like to paint an adventure with.
"Alas Poor Yorik, I knew there would be baby Kobolds here. Whether tis nobler to end their lives before they could be corrupted and harm others, or launch on a noble but futile quest to save them from their baser natures more learned men than I have debated since the dawn of time. Whatever shall we... oooo... skeletons...!!!! CHAARRRRRRRGE!
Sorry, I don't agree. It seems you're implying that someone who willingly becomes one of the undead is not doing an evil act? Are you saying that one's willingness to be involved in an evil act justifies the act?
Someone who willingly becomes one of the undead is committing an evil act.
Someone who takes a willing being and turns them into the undead is committing an evil act.
You were suggesting that the evilness of the undead creation process stemmed from the use of someone's corpse against their will. I was pointing out a situation where that idea wouldn't work, putting the evilness of the act back to being inherent in the act rather than it being a violation someone's will.
Sorry, I don't agree. It seems you're implying that someone who willingly becomes one of the undead is not doing an evil act? Are you saying that one's willingness to be involved in an evil act justifies the act?Someone who willingly becomes one of the undead is committing an evil act.
Someone who takes a willing being and turns them into the undead is committing an evil act.
You were suggesting that the evilness of the undead creation process stemmed from the use of someone's corpse against their will. I was pointing out a situation where that idea wouldn't work, putting the evilness of the act back to being inherent in the act rather than it being a violation someone's will.
I think you misread me, and I obviously misread your previous post. My point has nothing to do with the willingness of the deceased. I'm stating that the act and the spell are evil because of what is created; a perversion of a once living creature.
Grey areas of morality don't exclude black and white area's of morality. Occasionally its nice to have something that is purely, unquestioningly evil so the player can get back into the game of killing things and taking their stuff rather than pontificating on their role in the universe.
That I can agree with. It's nice to not have to question the morality of every single action.
Mind you, i LIKE gray areas of morality. I like moral quandaries. That doesn't mean its the only color i like to paint an adventure with.
Multiple levels of morality are interesting, I'm just saying that they're not exactly supported within the system.
I'd just like evil to be well defined. Some say it's selfishness. Some say it's destruction. Some say it's apathy. Some say it's pain. Some say it's mockery. Some say it's any of those things. Some say it's a combination of all of those things.
The only reason 'Evil' is as hotly debated as it is, is because although it's supposed to be subjective, it's not clearly defined.
whats the fuss with negative energy and the negative plane really? do you even know that living beings who visit the positive plane and stay there too long, tend to explode? I guess being extremely positive is also bad , eh?
The positive energy plane knows how to behave as a guest in the prime material: leave it better than you found it. The negative material plane keeps trying to trash the place worse than a rock band on a coke bender.
|
Selfishness is not good, no matter how pure your intentions may be. Use of the animate dead spell should taint your soul, a thing that is born of positive energy, because there is nothing positive about being selfish. Continued use of it, then, should run the risk of further taint to your soul, because you are allowing it to become a conduit for destructive energies from a realm that leaches life from those possess it. You are essentially allowing the abyss (to take another quote from Nietzsche) to gaze back into you, and thus running the risk of becoming the monster you're trying to fight.And this is where you are wrong. Selfishness is not inherently evil. I can think of dozens of examples to illustrate this, but I'm pressed for time and I'm willing to bet that you're plenty creative.
Lots of good things are selfish. The desire to keep living, protect the people you care for and create more and better ways of improving your quality of life included.
Self-interest, as you describe it (and that is what you're describing), is not inherently evil. The definitions for selfishness and self-interest are similar, but not the same.
self-interest
1. a concern for one's own advantage and well-being
2. one's own interest or advantage
A good person does have self-interest in the things you've described. However, that concern is not 'excessive.' And that is the key. A self-interested person can and will, for example, sacrifice themselves for others if the need to do so presented itself. The reasons for this vary, but often are representative of the very things that you've written about. A truly selfish person, on the other hand, will do no such thing as they prize their life above the lives of others. They have no time to worry about the needs of others as their own needs are the most paramount concern. What may have started out as mere self-interest evolved into something far worse.
Edit: Rick O'Connell from The Mummy films started out as self-interested but over time changed. Beni, from the first film, however, was a truly selfish person. And despite his comedic presentation, he was an evil man. And as Evelyn was quick to point out, nasty little fellows like him always get their comeuppance.
|
In my opinion, animate dead is evil because it desecrates the body of a living creature. It is not about animating what once was a piece of stone or iron as in a golem. It is about creating a thing that is a mockery of the living creature that the body once was. The energies or the rituals used to create undead are not as important as what the actual spell creates: a parody of the once living being.
Eating beef - not evil.
Tanning leather - not evil.
Making leather clothing - not evil.
Wearing leather boots until you wear holes in them - not evil
Boiling beef bones for stew - not evil
Cracking beef bones for marrow - not evil
Giving beef bones to dogs - not evil
Taxidermy - not evil
Animating an ox skeleton to pull a cart - evil
Taxidermy is not desecration. Now apologize to mother.
Skeletons, undead, powered by negative energy. Evil on creation
Wrights, (same)
Shadows, (same)
Vampires, (same)
Ghouls, (same)
Gasts, (same)
Ghosts, undead, powered by negative energy. Any alignment: Counterexample to your generalization. Therefore your generalization is false.
Shadowdancer's Shadows: any alignment. That's two counter-examples.Perhaps it has something to do with the source then?
Why should it? You're making a random logical leap with no real grounds for it. The source is irrelevant for this case.
And yours, that negative energy is Evil, would requireOh no. We've violated the sacred consistency of a mythical world. Surely this requires breaking out the misuse of latin.
You claim that negative energy is evil, which directly violates consistency.Yes. Otherwise there is no explanation. The OP asked for an explanation.
|
|
whats the fuss with negative energy and the negative plane really? do you even know that living beings who visit the positive plane and stay there too long, tend to explode? I guess being extremely positive is also bad , eh?
Though you were being sarcastic, yes, being extremely positive can in fact be a bad thing. All that sweetness and light can be enough to make anyone's head explode. ;)
|
|
But Animate Dead is.It wasn't until 3rd Edition, for silly and faulty reasons explained in Set's post above yours. Hence why that gets thrown out by a lot of folks in favor of something more reasonable and doesn't lock out a lot of character/story/setting concepts. As mentioned above, the 3rd Edition change absolutely ruins one entire setting if you shackle yourself to the rules as written.Ever seen a zombie movie? Have a close read of the Bestiary 2.
"..The pile of bones suddenly stirs, rising up to take on a human shape. Its long bony fingers reach out to claw the living.."
or this pearler..
"..Skeletons are the animated bones of the dead, brought to unlife through foul magic..."
and with and Int of 0 - they aren't "choosing" to do anything...
They are not misunderstood, nor do they twinkle in sunlight. You want Skeletons then make constructs (or Golems). Its the same result and you don't have to wear black. Otherwise calling up Grandma, someone's child or a horse is not just creepy, it's evil.
Imagine being surrounded animated horses and old friends, right now just standing to your left or sharing a lift with you....
creepy.
What does anything you said have to do with what I said?
I was not talking about the Bestiary. I was talking about what undead and necromancy could be without any fuss in editions prior to 3rd.
And how is creepy evil?
You can dress like the Grim Reaper and weild a scythe and still be a paladin in good standing with all the angels of Heaven.
You can be a Juju Oracle and roll with a crew of good aligned undead made by the rules and be perfectly NG.
(totally called someone trotting out the "digging up Grandma" caricature how many posts back? Do I win anything?)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Desecration of the dead isn't benign, no-one is going to come up and thread daisies through the eye-sockets of your mount. They are more likely to run away screaming for burly young men carrying axes and torches...
Unless the setting has always used such things, and has never seen it as a desecration, any more than we think building a house out of wood is a desecration of the dead trees used.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Creepy has the potential to be evil. (Creepy people sit alone on the bus for a reason).
So do bright shiny happy people. You know the bad thing about serial killers? They look just like everyone else.
Wearing black and carrying a scythe might not be evil - it could be a costume. But it's a short-sighted to think you will be received by a king or a high-priest in the same way as brightly polished knight in ceremonial armour. In fact at first glance you might look like the creepy haunt who has been taking the heads off anyone who goes into the graveyard at night.
Who said anything about being well-recieved? That doesn't make them any less good. It doesn't make them any more evil.
And the 'Grandma' idea, counts as the force that raise/animates your skeletal 'my little pony' is the same one that lets 'Grandma' claw her way out of her coffin.
You mean negative energy? Which isn't evil? And doesn't have anything to do with Grandma because no good/neutral necromancer is going to be digging her up anyway?
Where the hell is this connection coming from?
As for the Ju ju - I can see a lot of explaining in his/her future...
For what? Read the Juju's flavor. The souls of the dead aren't harmed at all, and if they do come back to inhabit those NON-EVIL undead serving the oracle, it's of their own free will.
FACT: By the rules, non-evil Juju Oracles make non-evil undead. Hardcoded in the rules.
Desecration of the dead isn't benign,
Depends on the culture involved. As said many a time upthread.
no-one is going to come up and thread daisies through the eye-sockets of your mount. They are more likely to run away screaming for burly young men carrying axes and torches...
That has nothing to do with whether or not necromany and undead can or cannot be non-evil. That's only about cultural reactions which, again, depend on the culture involved. And in a fantasy game filled with fantastic cultures, those reactions can be very varied indeed.
Especially considering all the myriad ways real world cultures have shown respect for the dead, whether it means ritual cremation, ritual dismemberment and feeding to carrion birds, or ritual mummifying them and keeping them around the house.
Just because any of those squick you out odesn't make them evil.
|
|
And how is creepy evil?Don't forget that satanic rock and roll music and that devil-game, dungeons and dragons!
Evil is what we say it is, and it's anything we think is icky.
Thanks for that, now I realize what this is boiling down to.
Need to leave the thread. I can tell this is just going to wind up pissing me off just like the "beating medusa rape victims to death is okay because MONSTERS ARE EVIL!!1" and "genocide and baby murderin' of orcs/goblins is okay because THEY ARE EVIL!!1" threads.
Ghosts, undead, powered by negative energy. Any alignment
What in the ghost description says its powered by negative energy?
Counterexample to your generalization. Therefore your generalization is false.
This is not how reason works and this is why people don't use philosophy for anything. By this logic smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because there are people who smoked for years and didn't get it and being male doesn't cause beard growth because there are bearded ladies.
A strong trend is a strong trend whether or not its absolute.
Even the ghost isn't much of an exception. The person the ghost was is fighting the influence of their current form, but that influence is still there.
Although ghosts can be any alignment, the majority cling to the living world out of a powerful sense of rage and hatred, and as a result are chaotic evil—even the ghost of a good or lawful creature can become hateful and cruel in its afterlife.
Shadowdancer's Shadows: any alignment.
You use material from the Plane of Shadow to shape quasi-real illusions of one or more creatures
The plane of shadow is not the plane of negative energy.
And yours, that negative energy is Evil, would requirea major edit of the magic system, where all negative energy spells would have to be [evil], and thus no good-aligned divine caster can cast them
Or just some handwaving about how its not evil if its only here instantaneously and doesn't get a chance to organize itself.
a significant edit to the planar features of N.E., adding evil traits.
*squiggle squiggle squiggle* Evil. Done.
Wow, what a booming topic! Too much to read.
I'll go out on a limb here and say animating the dead is much like 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'.
Ask yourself ...
Would a Paladin not ride an undead horse, if it was the only mode of transport available to save kids dying in an orphanage fire?
I think he would.
Would a paladin object to a Necromancer animating townsfolk recently slain while fighting the very same fire, if all hope had seemed lost?
I would think not, since their dying wish had been to save the children in the first place!
Evil and good are situational, in this case, and it's the intent of the Necromancer that defines him.
Note: The preceding statement is purely opinion and is not intended to reflect the opinions of anyone other than the poster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dead chickens are evil?Not if covered in secret herbs and spices... but people may take offence if it eats children and small dogs.
Keep them on the leash people.
6:30
Ghosts, undead, powered by negative energy. Any alignmentWhat in the ghost description says its powered by negative energy?
Creature type.
Ooo, I take that back. The Undead type only says 'spiritual or supernatural forces', not negative energy. Interesting.
It's a far shorter reach to say Ghosts are powered by negative energy (seeing as how they are bolstered or harmed by positive/negative energy the same as skeletons), than to make a claim that rewrites the RAW on planes and magic (what BNW claims).
That and the statement in Magic Jar.
Ghosts, undead, powered by negative energy. Any alignmentWhat in the ghost description says its powered by negative energy?
Creature type, and its relationship with positive/negative energy. That, and the unambiguous statement in the Magic Jar spell description.
Counterexample to your generalization. Therefore your generalization is false.This is not how reason works and this is why people don't use philosophy for anything. By this logic smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because there are people who smoked for years and didn't get it and being male doesn't cause beard growth because there are bearded ladies.
A strong trend is a strong trend whether or not its absolute.
Smoking doesn't cause lung cancer, in only increases the chances of getting it.
Being male doesn't cause beard growth, as per lizards and birds and many non-primates. Also, your mockery of my logic is broken - a bearded lady does not constitute a counterexample even if male->bearded. Because they're not mutually exclusive.What you are claiming is not a trend - it's an absolute: N.E is evil. That's no claim of a trend, it's pretty cut and dry.
It's equivalent to "for all instances of negative energy, they are evil". It's blatantly false by RAW.
A decently made game system stands strong against philosophical logic. Philosophy students and rules lawyers exist among the customer base too.
Majority does not equal absolute.Even the ghost isn't much of an exception. The person the ghost was is fighting the influence of their current form, but that influence is still there.
Although ghosts can be any alignment, the majority cling to the living world out of a powerful sense of rage and hatred, and as a result are chaotic evil—even the ghost of a good or lawful creature can become hateful and cruel in its afterlife.
The plane of shadow is not the plane of negative energy.point for you. Good catch.
Or just some handwaving about how its not evil if its only here instantaneously and doesn't get a chance to organize itself.
Chill touch is negative energy, non-[evil] and you can hold the charge for as long as you like.
Ghoul Touch is negative energy, with a duration, and also a charge that can be held. Also non-evil.Touch of Fatigue is negative energy, with a duration, and also a charge that can be held. Also non-evil.
Animate Dead has an instantaneous duration, much like Enervation does.
Your absolute claim continues to reach very far, despite facts, and with only invalid "trends" to back you up.
Your absolute claim continues to reach very far
What sort of trepanning tool do i need to use to make it clear that i am not making an absolute claim?
You don't like my explanation. FINE. DON"T USE IT. Run a completely arbitrary universe. Its random, its chaotic, it can never make sense because it doesn't adhere to every rule every single time. Creating undead is evil because some god played spin the bottle 10 times to decide what evil was and that was on the list as a joke.
So, is animating dead evil or not? After that link, I really want to play a necromancer! :D
Yes. No reason you couldn't do a Neutral necromancer though. Just make sure you save some orphans to balance it out.
Get ranks in cooking and you'll have the only undead around that make the peasants try to eat THEM.
You don't like my explanation. FINE. DON"T USE IT. Run a completely arbitrary universe. Its random, its chaotic, it can never make sense because it doesn't adhere to every rule every single time. Creating undead is evil because some god played spin the bottle 10 times to decide what evil was and that was on the list as a joke.
That's actually the kind of reply I was looking for.
BTW it does make sense from a game design standpoint - just not from a setting continuity one (not without some tweaks or additions).
I think much of this discussion is based off of what is the preconceived notion of evil. Is the death penalty evil? It still killing a person who was involved with killing a person. Why are swear words bad? Because someone in out past decided to say these words are vulgar and it has stuck with culture as a whole. IMO I think that mindless undead are not evil. If you are binding someone's spirit, against their will, to said undead to control them then I would consider that evil. On the same idea then dominate person should be looked at with the same type of scrutiny. I took an interest in this thread because I want to play a witch with the gravewalker archetype. While some of the thing within that class are clearly evil why couldn't I try to utilize that classes abilities to do good. The concept is a person who was born with these abilities and how best to utilize them and not be evil.