Is negative energy inherently evil? Can undead atone?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 125 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Argument closed.

Shadow Lodge

ok more detailed background

the rationale behind "undead are evil" is that negative energy is evil, (there was also juju zombies and retcons mentioned)

but the inflict spells, harm and channelled negative energy do not have the evil descriptor nor do several other negative energy spells such as defoliate.

in short "what gives"

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Negative energy is not evil. The negative energy plane is not evil. (Likewise positive energy isn't good, and the positive energy plane isn't good either).

Within Golarion's cosmos, the act of using negative energy to create undead is evil (with some rare/unique exceptions based on type of undead, manner of creation, circumstance, etc).


Hellfire Ray is totally evil. But alas, on topic.

Negative Energy is not inherently evil no. Casting inflict spells does not have the evil descriptor as a main point. Negative Energy is just the opposite of Positive Energy. They are as indifferent to our silly moral conundrums as the air we breathe or a rock on the ground.

Shadow Lodge

then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

Silver Crusade

Negative Energy is about as evil as fire, or a falling boulder, or broken glass on a salt flat. Not at all evil. You just probably don't want to roll around in it.

Hellfire Ray is terrifyingly evil though, yup.


Todd Stewart wrote:

Negative energy is not evil. The negative energy plane is not evil. (Likewise positive energy isn't good, and the positive energy plane isn't good either).

Within Golarion's cosmos, the act of using negative energy to create undead is evil (with some rare/unique exceptions based on type of undead, manner of creation, circumstance, etc).

Are undead evil simply because they are animatd with negative energy, or if they were to atone (as per the spell) could they remain at that alignment without too much trouble?


Lord Foul II wrote:
then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

Constructs are not related to negative energy at all.

Raise dead is basically just a healing spell that can bring back the very recently deceased.
The reason raise dead is evil is because the dev's said so.


I think it might have to do with negative energies primal purpose is kinda to destroy life, so when you infuse a body with that stuff it tends to go try it eh? When you drop a perfectly intelligent creature in a body full of destructive miasma it tends to slight toward that evil side.

Since this is in the rules section. Pretty much all undead are evil with the exceptions of ghosts, revenants, and haunts.


Scavion wrote:

I think it might have to do with negative energies primal purpose is kinda to destroy life, so when you infuse a body with that stuff it tends to go try it eh? When you drop a perfectly intelligent creature in a body full of destructive miasma it tends to slight toward that evil side.

Since this is in the rules section. Pretty much all undead are evil with the exceptions of ghosts, revenants, and haunts.

Yeah, but my question is- if atonement is used, does it actually work, or do they just slip back to "normal"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Foul II wrote:
then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

(a) Because desecrating the dead is icky.

(b) Because you're messing with someone's soul against their will (e.g. an undead creature can't be brought back to life with Raise Dead, so there must be some kind of soul shenanigans going on).

I'm just glad you didn't ask "why are vibrators legal, but necrophilia isn't?"


Interestingly, Pathfinder made almost all undead evil--even ones that were merely neutral in D&D. Ghosts and haunts are the sole exceptions, thanks to the juju oracle errata.

Shadow Lodge

icehawk333 wrote:
Lord Foul II wrote:
then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

Constructs are not related to negative energy at all.

Raise dead is basically just a healing spell that can bring back the very recently deceased.
The reason raise dead is evil is because the dev's said so.

I put constructs those three things are akin to undead

inflict spells: negative energy

constructs: bringing a semblance of life to the lifeless

raise dead: possibly the act of bringing someone back at all is what does it.


No. Most undead's natural state is evil. So atonement would only shift them back to that. However, the Redemption aspect could be something interesting but that leaves the rules portion of the game into DM interpretation and homebrew.


hogarth wrote:
Lord Foul II wrote:
then why is making undead evil in a way that leaves: craft construct, inflict spells, and raise dead NOT evil?

(a) Because desecrating the dead is icky.

(b) Because you're messing with someone's soul against their will (e.g. an undead creature can't be brought back to life with Raise Dead, so there must be some kind of soul shenanigans going on).

Sorta.

It's more because something else owns the body right now.

Can raise dead a soul into a living person's body?

Contributor

icehawk333 wrote:
Todd Stewart wrote:

Negative energy is not evil. The negative energy plane is not evil. (Likewise positive energy isn't good, and the positive energy plane isn't good either).

Within Golarion's cosmos, the act of using negative energy to create undead is evil (with some rare/unique exceptions based on type of undead, manner of creation, circumstance, etc).

Are undead evil simply because they are animatd with negative energy, or if they were to atone (as per the spell) could they remain at that alignment without too much trouble?

The act of creation using negative energy (and mocking the natural cycle of the mortal soul) seems to be evil, but does that act's dark status imply that the resulting creation must be evil? That's a more difficult question. I'm inclined to say it makes a bias towards their being evil, but given the nature of person prior to undeath, the creator's intent, the methods used, etc they aren't absolutely bound to be evil by default. But that's more a question for James Jacobs to have the final say (as with all questions regarding canon).

But I'll happily ramble on my thoughts on the subject.

Ghosts for instance can be of any alignment, and there are two examples that I can think of for non-evil liches (that I'm responsible for). But the latter I would classify as rarer than rare, and it's an open question if they embraced lichdom via unique methods that allowed them to remain non-evil, or if they began as evil and later rose to their current status.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
hogarth wrote:


(a) Because desecrating the dead is icky.

This is very much a cultural thing to me - though if the rules of Golarion's cosmos are different, then so be it.

In a Campaign setting I designed once, I had a kingdom that was loosely based on Egypt - except that raising your ancestors as undead was considered an honour (this was the "afterlife" for them). You honoured them by wanting them to stay among you, to show them that they were still useful and worthwhile even after they have passed from this mortal coil.

Choosing not to have your ancestor raised was a /grave/ insult, and akin to our view of "desecration".


Scavion wrote:
No. Most undead's natural state is evil. So atonement would only shift them back to that. However, the Redemption aspect could be something interesting but that leaves the rules portion of the game into DM interpretation and homebrew.

I meant the redemption aspect.

There is a trait that can be used to as an immediate action cast atonement on yourself once in your lifetime.

If turned into a vampire, using the redemption feature as an immediate action as you are animated allows for a alignment change to whatever you used to be.

Can redemption actually work or do they slip back?

Dark Archive

icehawk333 wrote:
Todd Stewart wrote:

Negative energy is not evil. The negative energy plane is not evil. (Likewise positive energy isn't good, and the positive energy plane isn't good either).

Within Golarion's cosmos, the act of using negative energy to create undead is evil (with some rare/unique exceptions based on type of undead, manner of creation, circumstance, etc).

Are undead evil simply because they are animatd with negative energy, or if they were to atone (as per the spell) could they remain at that alignment without too much trouble?

Not to the topic of negative energy, but to the question of why are undead evil: In my own mythos "undead" can be either good or evil, depending on the way they were created.

An undead that was created without the consent of the soul of whoever owned the body is inherently evil because the act that created it was a violation to it's remains. The creature does not want to exist, and the sooner it's gone the better. It despises the living and envies them as well. All because someone decided to bring them back to be used as meat shields.

If you read the descriptions of many undeads, such as the Huecuva or the Ghoul, you'll notice the word "Hate" or some variant of it, to be present more often than not.

I wouldn't say negative energy is evil. I would say it's a force commonly used for evil, and thus associated with the concept on both Golarion and the real world.


Note that alignments in D&D are full of strange rules. It is quite possible for a single creature to detect strongly as evil AND as good.

Grand Lodge

Almost all undead are evil because inherently they hate their accursed, unnatural existence and want or need to destroy life. Creating such undead is an evil act against both the dead person twisted into foul undeath and the living that it's free to prey upon. It's not because of negative energy.

Creating an undead that is content with its state, is not hateful by nature and doesn't feed upon the living would, in theory, not be an evil act. Juju oracles no longer do this.


Constructs do not have a semblance of life any more than a robot in a factory does. It is an animated object and not a parody of life.

Undead are anti-life. They are a parody of life and prevent the proper disposition of the soul in the afterlife.

Raise Dead does not prevent the proper disposition of the soul. Eventually the person will still die and the soul will still go to the afterlife. This just delays the process which, in the cosmic timetable, does not matter.

In short, creating an undead takes souls out of circulation since they are no longer accessible. They are a parody of life and are a violation of life.

- Gauss

Edit: added stuff

Shadow Lodge

icehawk333 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
No. Most undead's natural state is evil. So atonement would only shift them back to that. However, the Redemption aspect could be something interesting but that leaves the rules portion of the game into DM interpretation and homebrew.

I meant the redemption aspect.

There is a trait that can be used to as an immediate action cast atonement on yourself once in your lifetime.

If turned into a vampire, using the redemption feature as an immediate action as you are animated allows for a alignment change to whatever you used to be.

Can redemption actually work or do they slip back?

according to one AP yes to both


Starglim wrote:

Almost all undead are evil because inherently they hate their accursed, unnatural existence and want or need to destroy life. Creating such undead is an evil act against both the dead person twisted into foul undeath and the living that it's free to prey upon. It's not because of negative energy.

Creating an undead that is content with its state, is not hateful by nature and doesn't feed upon the living would, in theory, not be an evil act. Juju oracles no longer do this.

Liches are evil, despite their consent.

Shadow Lodge

Gauss wrote:

Constructs do not have a semblance of life any more than a robot in a factory does. It is an animated object and not a parody of life.

Undead are anti-life. They are a parody of life and prevent the proper disposition of the soul in the afterlife.

Raise Dead does not prevent the proper disposition of the body and soul. Eventually the person will still die and the soul will go to the afterlife.

- Gauss

what about a wizard with the immortality discovery?


icehawk333 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
No. Most undead's natural state is evil. So atonement would only shift them back to that. However, the Redemption aspect could be something interesting but that leaves the rules portion of the game into DM interpretation and homebrew.

I meant the redemption aspect.

There is a trait that can be used to as an immediate action cast atonement on yourself once in your lifetime.

If turned into a vampire, using the redemption feature as an immediate action as you are animated allows for a alignment change to whatever you used to be.

Can redemption actually work or do they slip back?

Honestly I would say no, though that sounds really cool. If your turned into a vampire, that is what you are now. Your alignment shifts to evil and I don't believe you can use the redemption aspect on yourself since it states using it on another creature.


Scavion wrote:
icehawk333 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
No. Most undead's natural state is evil. So atonement would only shift them back to that. However, the Redemption aspect could be something interesting but that leaves the rules portion of the game into DM interpretation and homebrew.

I meant the redemption aspect.

There is a trait that can be used to as an immediate action cast atonement on yourself once in your lifetime.

If turned into a vampire, using the redemption feature as an immediate action as you are animated allows for a alignment change to whatever you used to be.

Can redemption actually work or do they slip back?

Honestly I would say no, though that sounds really cool. If your turned into a vampire, that is what you are now. Your alignment shifts to evil and I don't believe you can use the redemption aspect on yourself since it states using it on another creature.

Ah.

The trait is "absolute loyalty"

Benefits: You gain the one-time ability to immediately cast atonement upon yourself as a spell-like ability upon performing an act or being subjected to an effect that spell affects. This ability can only be used while you are acting in the service of your liege (an individual of higher social standing chosen when you take this feat).

Reverse Magical Alignment Change: If a creature has had its alignment magically changed, atonement returns its alignment to its original status at no additional cost.

But that's too bad. I thought i had found a cool way to play an undead in a rules heavy campain.

Oh well, never playing undead.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Scavion wrote:
Honestly I would say no, though that sounds really cool. If your turned into a vampire, that is what you are now. Your alignment shifts to evil and I don't believe you can use the redemption aspect on yourself since it states using it on another creature.

So then Undead are inherently evil, even if they do not wish to be? For example, a paladin forcibly turned into a vampire... then receives an Atonement spell. He may have instincts that compel him to feed or to hate the living... but... when I'm driving in traffic, I hate the living, does that make me evil? Am I forced to act on that hatred? No.


The Wizard with the immortality discovery will still die someday. His soul will still go to the afterlife. He is not a parody of life.

There are still many other ways to die and someday, one of them will happen.

In the cosmic timetable his soul being out of circulation little bit longer is a non-issue. If he lives an extra 5,000 years that is an eyeblink on cosmic terms.

Creating an undead takes the soul out of circulation unless extremely powerful magics are used to restore it (such as Resurrection and True Ressurection).

- Gauss


Gauss wrote:

The Wizard with the immortality discovery will still die someday. His soul will still go to the afterlife. He is not a parody of life.

There are still many other ways to die and someday, one of them will happen.

In the cosmic timetable his soul being out of circulation little bit longer is a non-issue. If he lives an extra 5,000 years that is an eyeblink on cosmic terms.

Undead however take the soul out of circulation unless extremely powerful magics are used to restore it.

- Gauss

Where do you get that idea?

Can i see a quote or something?

Death effects prevent the soul from returning by things like raise dead, but they aren't evil.


FireclawDrake, he may have instincts to feed on the living and may fight them, up until he either succumbs or is weakened to the point where he is no longer able to defend himself and is destroyed. Vampires need to feed.

Also, an Atonement requires him working towards restoring his alignment. I have a hard time with people who say "Ok, I want an atonement to fix an external alignment change."

If you are turned evil via a curse or magic or whatnot you will want to stay that way unless somehow shown the error of your ways. THEN the atonement can restore you. You will probably at that point want to be destroyed since you are inherently evil and you will always need to feed on people.

- Gauss


FireclawDrake wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Honestly I would say no, though that sounds really cool. If your turned into a vampire, that is what you are now. Your alignment shifts to evil and I don't believe you can use the redemption aspect on yourself since it states using it on another creature.

So then Undead are inherently evil, even if they do not wish to be? For example, a paladin forcibly turned into a vampire... then receives an Atonement spell. He may have instincts that compel him to feed or to hate the living... but... when I'm driving in traffic, I hate the living, does that make me evil? Am I forced to act on that hatred? No.

In short, YES. Vampires are automatically inherently evil. You got turned into one? Apply the Vampire template. Whats that? First thing you do? Evil: Any.

Since this is a permanent change that is your *now* natural state as an abomination. He would not take an atonement willingly, and his alignment is now evil

But like I said, you can always stretch outside the bounds and do some cool homebrew stuff. I'm all for a paladin overpowering his evil nature. However he'd most likely try to get someone to kill him and raise dead him since that returns you to normal.

When you become an undead, you become almost like a completely new person. Except evil now. There is no not wishing to be undead. Nobody WANTS to be undead unless they're already a sicko.


Scavion wrote:
FireclawDrake wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Honestly I would say no, though that sounds really cool. If your turned into a vampire, that is what you are now. Your alignment shifts to evil and I don't believe you can use the redemption aspect on yourself since it states using it on another creature.

So then Undead are inherently evil, even if they do not wish to be? For example, a paladin forcibly turned into a vampire... then receives an Atonement spell. He may have instincts that compel him to feed or to hate the living... but... when I'm driving in traffic, I hate the living, does that make me evil? Am I forced to act on that hatred? No.

In short, YES. Vampires are automatically inherently evil. You got turned into one? Apply the Vampire template. Whats that? First thing you do? Evil: Any.

Since this is a permanent change that is your *now* natural state as an abomination. He would not take an atonement willingly, and his alignment is now evil

But like I said, you can always stretch outside the bounds and do some cool homebrew stuff. I'm all for a paladin overpowering his evil nature. However he'd most likely try to get someone to kill him and raise dead him since that returns you to normal.

Note-

Evil does not always mean you enjoy it.
Why would the redemption feature even exist if evil creatures never wanted to change?

Dark Archive

icehawk333 wrote:
Starglim wrote:

Almost all undead are evil because inherently they hate their accursed, unnatural existence and want or need to destroy life. Creating such undead is an evil act against both the dead person twisted into foul undeath and the living that it's free to prey upon. It's not because of negative energy.

Creating an undead that is content with its state, is not hateful by nature and doesn't feed upon the living would, in theory, not be an evil act. Juju oracles no longer do this.

Liches are evil, despite their consent.

In Undeads revised it's stated that not all Liches start off as evil. They just become so after many years of loosing grasp of their mortality and the constant persecution that they must endure from a world that hates them, even if they actually turned to been undead with good intentions.

If you were constantly persecuted and people tried to kill you at every turn just because you are you, I wouldn't blame you for turning into a crazy undead sociopath.


Gauss wrote:

FireclawDrake, he may have instincts to feed on the living and may fight them, up until he either succumbs or is weakened to the point where he is no longer able to defend himself and is destroyed. Vampires need to feed.

Also, an Atonement requires him working towards restoring his alignment. I have a hard time with people who say "Ok, I want an atonement to fix an external alignment change."

If you are turned evil via a curse or magic or whatnot you will want to stay that way unless somehow shown the error of your ways. THEN the atonement can restore you. You will probably at that point want to be destroyed since you are inherently evil and you will always need to feed on people.

- Gauss

Funny, "feed" doesn't mean "kill". 1d6 con damage, resoring at a rate of 1 point a day.

If your a cleric, restore it for them.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Maybe I'm not asking the right question here:

*Why*, if negative energy is not inherently evil, are undead inherently evil (save for Ghosts/Haunts)? What /causes/ the alignment shift? It can't be the negative energy - we've already established that as not being evil in and of itself.

So... why? Where is this evil coming from? I'm sure Vampires do not believe they are abominations - all living things need to feed. A tiger that kills a sentient being for food is not evil - why should a Vampire who kills a sentient being for food be evil?


Redemption is getting covered in Wrath of the Righteous.

All I'm saying is without heavy external forces, no, evil people don't WANT to change. Drinking blood just feels good to a vampire plus draws sustenance from it.

A normal man who walks the path of evil can be redeemed because no one normal is evil down to their very core. Undead are. Same thing with demons. I get even angrier about people trying to redeem demons/devils. They are the physical manifestation of evil. If they ever derive away from that, they change completely on a physical level as well. Angels of Redemption =D


So, vampires cannot shift form evil.

Overall, my belief on this is that is total hogwash.

Plain and simple- if you can think, you have a choice.

If you must be evil, then your int needs to become - , as you don't make decisions- there are no options.

So "sentient" undead don't exist.

....
You know what, ok.
No undead pc's ever.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gauss wrote:

The Wizard with the immortality discovery will still die someday. His soul will still go to the afterlife. He is not a parody of life.

There are still many other ways to die and someday, one of them will happen.

In the cosmic timetable his soul being out of circulation little bit longer is a non-issue. If he lives an extra 5,000 years that is an eyeblink on cosmic terms.

Creating an undead takes the soul out of circulation unless extremely powerful magics are used to restore it (such as Resurrection and True Ressurection).

- Gauss

no an immortal 20th lvl wizard very well may not die, immortal is right there in the name

and you would need true ressurection if someone destroyed the body with flame strike does that make flamestrike evil?

and you are citing cultural "evils" which have no place here


Scavion wrote:

Redemption is getting covered in Wrath of the Righteous.

All I'm saying is without heavy external forces, no, evil people don't WANT to change. Drinking blood just feels good to a vampire plus draws sustenance from it.

A normal man who walks the path of evil can be redeemed because no one normal is evil down to their very core. Undead are. Same thing with demons. I get even angrier about people trying to redeem demons/devils. They are the physical manifestation of evil. If they ever derive away from that, they change completely on a physical level as well. Angels of Redemption =D

Funny, there are actual stated rules for non-evil demons.

No, they don't- they count as both evil and thier new alignment at all times.

The evil subtype is clear on that.


Icehawk333, which idea are you asking about? The Resurrection one? Its right in the spell. You cannot use Raise Dead to restore a person who has been turned into an undead even if they have been destroyed. It takes Resurrection or True Resurrection.

As for being undead taking a soul out of circulation I present James Jacobs comments (and unlike the rules section he is in charge of the fluff of Golarion).

James Jacobs stating souls are taken out of circulation when turned into an undead

- Gauss


Gauss wrote:

Icehawk333, which idea are you asking about? The Resurrection one? Its right in the spell. You cannot use Raise Dead to restore a person who has been turned into an undead even if they have been destroyed. It takes Resurrection or True Resurrection.

As for being undead taking a soul out of circulation I present James Jacobs comments (and unlike the rules section he is in charge of the fluff of Golarion).

James Jacobs stating souls are taken out of circulation when turned into an undead

- Gauss

Read the post.

Ok, let's see... Dead for 100 years.
Rases as a Skeleton...
They somehow teleport out of the afterlife, and are undead now.
Makes perfect sense.

Seriously, I'll never understand the rules on undead.


As Pathfinder stands right now. I'm sorry but thats true.

Undead DON'T have a choice. You can make plenty of decisions within that frame of evil. You can gain plenty of evil motivations or you could just be in it for the slaughter.

Just because you have an inherent need to cause harm doesn't mean you can't make decisions. Also keep in mind that Evil folks have friends and loved ones as well. Its perfectly reasonable to have a Vampire who looks after his family but feeds on others.


Scavion wrote:

As Pathfinder stands right now. I'm sorry but thats true.

Undead DON'T have a choice. You can make plenty of decisions within that frame of evil. You can gain plenty of evil motivations or you could just be in it for the slaughter.

Just because you have an inherent need to cause harm doesn't mean you can't make decisions. Also keep in mind that Evil folks have friends and loved ones as well. Its perfectly reasonable to have a Vampire who looks after his family but feeds on others.

Feeding isn't evil.

Killing is evil.

Funny, but feeding and killing aren't the same thing.

Ever heard of restoration?

Also- undead dont need to eat.
They crave it, and desire it, but humans crave things, so does that mean we always do what we crave?

(Hint- no.)


Lord Foul II, immortality is from natural aging, not from damage. In the grand scheme of things they will still die. As for cultural evils, this is a discussion about the fluff of Golarion, it is not a discussion about the rules ever since the first question was answered.

Question: Is negative energy inherently evil
Rules answer: No

Then the debate devolved into why it is not and why some uses of negative energy are and others are not. That gets into the way the writers wrote the world.

If you don't like it, reflavor it in your own world or game but that doesn't have any place in this particular discussion.

- Gauss


Gauss wrote:

Lord Foul II, immortality is from natural aging, not from damage. In the grand scheme of things they will still die. As for cultural evils, this is a discussion about the fluff of Golarion, it is not a discussion about the rules ever since the first question was answered.

Question: Is negative energy inherently evil
Rules answer: No

Then the debate devolved into why it is not and why some uses of negative energy are and others are not. That gets into the way the writers wrote the world.

If you don't like it, reflavor it in your own world or game but that doesn't have any place in this particular discussion.

- Gauss

I apologize. The debate was supposed to be about undead., but i wrote it poorly.

I'll fix that.


Icehawk333, Somewhere someone once asked how people can be brought back to life when the soul has been judged. James Jacobs responded (paraphrasing, this is off of memory) that even if it has been 1,000 years they have not yet been judged. Judgement is out of the scope of ANY timeframe you might imagine.

In short, 100 years is nothing in the afterlife. But it STILL takes the soul out of circulation forever.

Anyhow, this is the rules forum and we are now very very far away from the rules. This is world specific fluff we are into. I suggest if you do not like it, refluff it to how you want.

- Gauss


Gauss wrote:

Icehawk333, Somewhere someone once asked how people can be brought back to life when the soul has been judged. James Jacobs responded (paraphrasing, this is off of memory) that even if it has been 1,000 years they have not yet been judged. Judgement is out of the scope of ANY timeframe you might imagine.

In short, 100 years is nothing in the afterlife. But it STILL takes the soul out of circulation forever.

Anyhow, this is the rules forum and we are now very very far away from the rules. This is world specific fluff we are into. I suggest if you do not like it, refluff it to how you want.

- Gauss

So as per the rules, undead cannot be good, so no undead pc's ever.

Understood.
I have given up.

Also, i can't refluff anything.
It's a world, with strict rules.

Shadow Lodge

Gauss wrote:

Lord Foul II, immortality is from natural aging, not from damage. In the grand scheme of things they will still die. As for cultural evils, this is a discussion about the fluff of Golarion, it is not a discussion about the rules ever since the first question was answered.

the same is true for undead, I've "killed" dozens of them

and at the power tier that a wizard can get the immortality discovery they are usually better than the average vampire at staying alive (note average vampire being a lvl 8 +template)

heck you could become a god, by this logic would touching the starstone and becoming a god of life and light be "evil"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gauss wrote:

Icehawk333, which idea are you asking about? The Resurrection one? Its right in the spell. You cannot use Raise Dead to restore a person who has been turned into an undead even if they have been destroyed. It takes Resurrection or True Resurrection.

As for being undead taking a soul out of circulation I present James Jacobs comments (and unlike the rules section he is in charge of the fluff of Golarion).

James Jacobs stating souls are taken out of circulation when turned into an undead

- Gauss

That is a very good, essentially flawless explanation for why most undead are evil in Golarion.

It does not explain, in any capacity, why Create Undead has the [Evil] descriptor in the supposedly-world-neutral CRB.
The fluff about creating undead affecting the person's soul is setting-specific. It applies in Golarion. It doesn't apply in any other setting. And the core rules are suppose to be setting-neutral.

Of course, it's hardly the first time Golarion-specific fluff has spilled over into the "setting-neutral" books, nor is it one of the biggest offenders...
that designation may go to the list of 20 Golarion gods in the core rulebook. Totally not setting-specific:)

1 to 50 of 125 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Is negative energy inherently evil? Can undead atone? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.