I'll be honest, this classification comes from stuff like "The dead belong to the dead", not messing up with a creature's corpse, violating the natural cycle of life and death, creating a mockery of life, etc.
I don't think we need a specific, made-up explanation to make making undead 100% sure to be evil that just seems overly contrived and unnecessary.
This would be rightly an important discussion *if* Necromancy was relegated to just "create undead". AD&D and some previews from PF2 shows us that this isn't the case. A "White Necromancer" still has many spells to use ^^
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
With all those ground rules... there is literally nothing to discuss.
"Possessing only instincts, some might attempt to argue that the Zombie should be neutral, but as we know that they are not neutral, the should argument is discounted"
All you have are tautologies.
I don't think we need a specific, made-up explanation to make making undead 100% sure to be evil that just seems overly contrived and unnecessary.
The topic seems not to be about the creation of undead, but rather the undead themselves. That the creation of undead is evil is not only fact, but the reasons why are established in the narrative. The real question is, why are the undead creatures themselves inherently evil. Why do we not see ghouls, zombies and skeletons who are perfectly harmless and friendly.
The answer to this, I believe by the way, is the soul. Outsiders don't have souls, or rather, they don't have souls separate from their bodies. Their soul is intrinsic to their being, a physiological fact, which is why only divine intervention can give them the option to change. Likewise, undead do not have complete souls. What they have are shredded, twisted facsimiles of souls. As a result they, like all aligned outsiders, have no true free will. They don't have the capacity to not be evil. They can choose to do things that aren't evil, but they will not do so for altruistic purposes, only their benefit. Ramoska Arkminos, Pathfinder's famous "friendly" vampire, for instance, will happily work with PCs, seeks to cure vampirism, and is generally a sociable, affable person. He's still evil. He still feels no remorse over the killing of others, he feeds as he needs to, he'll perform incredibly unethical experiments to further his research. It's in his nature. He can't not.
The exception to this is ghosts. Ghosts aren't twisted, shattered souls (necessarily), but souls that were unable to move on to the other side. As a result, they're still whatever alignment they were when they died. This doesn't mean they have free will, any more than an angel does despite being Good. It just means that they aren't inherently driven towards evil.
My two cents, anyway.
Rework the positive energy and negative energy planes to good/evil analogues, problem solved. Undead = negative energy = evil. Evil spells, draw from negative plane, evil.
Ghosts and other rare non evil undead can be people who were just so good in life or whose minds are so lost and damaged in undeath they resist the corruption but it becomes harder to do so the longer they remain active.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are already explanations, they just make no sense...
Generally speaking, non-intelligent undead such as zombies and skeletons possess no souls. Little more than puppets of flesh and bone, animated by negative energy in a warped attempt at life, these automatons have no attachment to the souls of their former owners, and are evil merely due to the corrupting influence of the Negative Energy Plane.
The thing is, there is NO "corrupting influence of the Negative Energy Plane". The plane is neutral. Negative energy is neutral. It's the equivalent of saying frankenstein's monster was evil because of the corrupting influence of electricity and/or the elemental planes...
Secondly, you can't be mindless AND have an alignment. It's oxymoronic. You can't be devoid of thought AND tend to think evilly...
While many intelligent undead are evil, their alignment can often be seen as the result of the manner of their deaths, rather than the energies that animate their bodies or link them to the Material Plane.
So a reason for some undead to be evil: trama from their death. I'm fine with that but that only covers "many" undead: there should be as much a likelihood of well adjusted intelligent undead as good goblins...
In essence, the undead = always evil trope boils down to 'cuz magic'. They are evil because they are evil in a circular motion of evil cuz magic.
I feel like if the splat literally describing the multiverse describes the negative energy plane as having a corrupting influence, that means the negative energy plane has a corrupting influence, regardless of forum posts to the contrary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As per comments by James Jacobs - Undead created using the spell "Animate Dead" are evil because it requires a piece of the soul of the being that you are animating, it rips it from wherever it is, and tortures it in order to animate the undead. This creates a creature that is fueled by pain, hate, and suffering.
This in incorrect based on The Great Beyond for mindless undead: "non-intelligent undead such as zombies and skeletons possess no souls". This also means that "like all undead, the zombie cannot be resurrected while still in the undead state" should be incorrect: no souls are involved, just the body. It should only be intelligent undead that prevent raising.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like if the splat literally describing the multiverse describes the negative energy plane as having a corrupting influence, that means the negative energy plane has a corrupting influence, regardless of forum posts to the contrary.
It goes into much further explanation of the plane and goes to the trouble of explaining it's neutrality.
"Known simply as the Void, the Negative Energy Plane empowers undead just as positive energy is the driving force behind all living things, but contrary to some religious dogma, neither it nor its destructive energies are evil. As dangerous and antithetical to life as they might be, they simply exist as an opposite to the creative potential of the positive, divorced from any notion of morality.
Note "divorced from any notion of morality" and "contrary to some religious dogma, neither it nor its destructive energies are evil". The book LITERALLY STATES the plane and it's energies ARE NOT EVIL!!! So... they are corrupted by the awful and horrible state of neutrality?
The plane isn't, connecting it to material things certainly can be.
With all those ground rules... there is literally nothing to discuss.
"Possessing only instincts, some might attempt to argue that the Zombie should be neutral, but as we know that they are not neutral, the should argument is discounted"
All you have are tautologies.
Yep. I'm also having trouble figuring out how the OP reads as anything other than "Under the premise that I'm always right, am I always right? Ah-ah-ah! No going off-topic".
I mean, I can do that, too. "Under the premise that your favorite food is bacon, what's your favorite food?" I can frame a discussion under all the hyper-specific premises I want; that doesn't mean anyone is obligated to accept them. That's why these arguments get the pushback they do; not because we can't follow the premises to the only logical (term used loosely) conclusion they can have, but because the premises themselves are so fundamentally contrary to some aspect or aspects (or even the entirety) of how we understand good, evil, action, intention, etc.
The plane isn't, connecting it to material things certainly can be.
Then it's the act and not the energy or the plane... I don't see the issue. That would make something in the raising process the evil part. Something by itself defined as "divorced from any notion of morality" can't be a source of corruption: it just IS. Again, it's like calling electricity corrupting...
This also doesn't explain how mindless creatures can have moral thoughts...
5. All posters who post in this thread understand and accept that Pathfinder uses its own definition for Good, Evil, and Neutral acts. These definitions may or may not align with anyone's real world beliefs on Good, Evil, and Neutrality. Arguments based on anyone's real world understanding of Good, Evil, and Neutrality aren't pursuant to the topic as we are only discussing the Pathfinder setting as outlined in this document and the preface there in.So, these are the definitions in PF1's CRB
Good Versus Evil
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.
Yep. I'm also having trouble figuring out how the OP reads as anything other than "Under the premise that I'm always right, am I always right? Ah-ah-ah! No going off-topic".
Quite honestly, I ignored the 'rules' and dove into the debate about the topic. If the dev's feel they should remove posts, it'll be the OP post sitting by itself...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It absolutely can be a source of corruption. Just like any pure material introduced to another compound can emit poisonous gas, or explode.
Things from the material plane aren't meant to mesh with the negative energy plane, or even the positive plane in too great a fashion. Its entirely possible that mortal magic and mortal remains exposed to it adopt its own hungry antithesis of life which...is evil on the material plane.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
3. This thread assumes that Alignment in PF2, like in PF1, is largely objective rather than subjective. By this we mean that, while there are some exceptions to the rule, generally speaking, in Pathfinder, good and evil are non subjective terms.
Inquiry: Who sets the objectives for objective good and evil? The creative director? The development team? Paizo as a whole (and if so, through what system do they settle disagreements)? Gary Gygax? HWalsh (there OP)? The current GM?
It absolutely can be a source of corruption.
It can totally corrupt... with the power of neutrality. Now much neutrality makes you evil?
Its entirely possible that mortal magic and mortal remains exposed to it adopt its own hungry antithesis of life which...is evil on the material plane.
We know this isn't true... Inflict wounds isn't evil. negative energy blasts aren't evil. So material plane + negative energy does NOT equal evil. A rampaging kill bot doesn't become evil because it's programed to be a "antithesis of life". If you power a toaster with negative energy, it doesn't become evil: neutral + neutral becomes evil how?
It boils down to undead are evil cuz... magic? There isn't a logical reason behind it so it must be a personal one.
I don't think this is about the Negative Energy stuff as it is. It's related to the concepts I explained above. Negative Energy (Death) is what it is, but using it to create those mockeries of life, and [other stuff I mentioned]...
This sounds like a homebrew thread, not discussing the playtest rules.
As per comments by James Jacobs - Undead created using the spell "Animate Dead" are evil because it requires a piece of the soul of the being that you are animating, it rips it from wherever it is, and tortures it in order to animate the undead. This creates a creature that is fueled by pain, hate, and suffering.This in incorrect based on The Great Beyond for mindless undead: "non-intelligent undead such as zombies and skeletons possess no souls". This also means that "like all undead, the zombie cannot be resurrected while still in the undead state" should be incorrect: no souls are involved, just the body. It should only be intelligent undead that prevent raising.
It also possible that the "no soul is involved" has joined many other things now found in Misogynistic Erastil's Book of Retconed Setting Material. Hopefully Planar Adventures will actually cover this and we may see a change to what James Jacobs now says is cannon.
As for undead being evil I can accept most being evil but one I would love possibly see getting a change come PF2ed would be Mummys. Them being innately evil always stuck me as a missed opportunity
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
As for undead being evil I can accept most being evil but one I would love possibly see getting a change come PF2ed would be Mummys. Them being innately evil always stuck me as a missed opportunity
The Iroran mummy (first detailed in the Irori deity write-up in the Jade Regent Book 5, I believe?) from Dragon's Demand says hello ^^.
Oh and yes all Undead were supposedly Evil...
Until someone on the development team, a Free-lance writer contracted by Paizo, or some other person working in some manner under the company came up with the idea of a Non-Evil undead, which seem like a really cool idea or made for a great lynchpin in an adventure or whatnot.
Thus the first Non-Evil undead was "born" and thus the absolute was (as so often before) broken.
Why? Well probably because whoever thought up the idea thought it was cool enough to try to put to paper. Its inclusion thus became a tacit approval of the fact that, in the end, a cool fun story trumps everything else, even established setting cannon, flavor or "rules".
·
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't have to be a binary
IMO it pretty much does. It's like saying 'this isn't poisonous but is the cause of the poison"... So I disagree. At best, it might be a corruption that JUST happens to use negative energy. Water isn't flammable but it's possible to get hydrogen from it this IS flammable: that doesn't make the water flammable...
In essence, it's the act of raising the dead that's evil and not the undead in Sodium bicarbonate + vinegar example: it's the action, mixing, that is the cause.
It also possible that the "no soul is involved" has joined many other things now found in Misogynistic Erastil's Book of Retconed Setting Material. Hopefully Planar Adventures will actually cover this and we may see a change to what James Jacobs now says is cannon.
As for undead being evil I can accept most being evil but one I would love possibly see getting a change come PF2ed would be Mummys. Them being innately evil always stuck me as a missed opportunity
It's quite possible it's like when I had a debate on constructs taking damage from negative energy. When I talked with Mark he replied 'of COURSE they don't take damage'. When I asked where it said that, crickets... It required an FAQ to 'fix' it. Once you are used to something for so long, sometimes you get set in how you think of things. This just strikes me as 'that's how it's always been' as opposed to an actual rule.
PS: there is also my personal opinion that mindless creatures shouldn't have an alignment: mindless is incompatible with a moral compass.
This is to pitch plausible explanations for Paizo to use because currently a small portion of the player base disagrees with the statement of undead being evil because they find the explanation lacking. This is to shore up that weakness in the PF lore/setting/rules and as such is directly pursuant to the playtest forums.
The current reason they are is because the dev's say they are: full stop. The Great Beyond book explains why some undead might be evil... That's far from a reason all should be that by default.
IMO, I think the lore should be change to remove the 'always evil' part. Remove all alignment from mindless creatures. Make undead as evil as the average goblin: once in a blue moon good [or at least non-evil].
Honestly, with Mummies being tomb guardians, a ritualized and sanctioned action by a church, and all of that, is a really good candidate to undead which is not evil to create. It would avoid all the problems probably truly behind "creating undead is evil".
That's a pretty unique case, though.
Honestly, with Mummies being tomb guardians, a ritualized and sanctioned action by a church, and all of that, is a really good candidate to undead which is not evil to create. It would avoid all the problems probably truly behind "creating undead is evil".
That's a pretty unique case, though.
There was some edition where mummies were some weird undead connected to the positive energy plane. I think it was 2nd ed but i could be off.
There was some edition where mummies were some weird undead connected to the positive energy plane. I think it was 2nd ed but i could be off.Honestly, with Mummies being tomb guardians, a ritualized and sanctioned action by a church, and all of that, is a really good candidate to undead which is not evil to create. It would avoid all the problems probably truly behind "creating undead is evil".
That's a pretty unique case, though.
It was 2nd. They were LE too.
"On occasion, perhaps due to powerful evil magic or perhaps because the individual was so greedy in life that he refuses to give up his treasure, the spirit of the mummified person will not die, but taps into energy from the Positive Material plane and is transformed into an undead horror. Most mummies remain dormant until their treasure is taken, but then they become aroused and kill without mercy.
A mummy lives in its ancient burial chamber, usually in the heart of a crypt or pyramid. The tomb is a complex series of chambers filled with relics (mostly nonmagical). These relics include models of the mummy’s possessions, favorite items and treasures, the bodies of dead pets, and foodstuffs to feed the spirit after death. Particularly evil people will have slaves or family members slain when they die so the slaves can be buried with them. Because of their magical properties, mummies exist on both Prime and Positive Material planes."
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This sounds like a homebrew thread, not discussing the playtest rules.Not at all - This isn't homebrew.
Currently - Undead are evil - those are the rules. This is to pitch plausible explanations for Paizo to use because currently a small portion of the player base disagrees with the statement of undead being evil because they find the explanation lacking. This is to shore up that weakness in the PF lore/setting/rules and as such is directly pursuant to the playtest forums.
We don't find the explanation lacking - we find it directly contradictory to the printed text.
James Jacobs says that souls are involved in animating or creating the undead.
Well, can we point that out in the spell descriptions at all? No we can't:
Animate Undead
Create Undead
Create Greater Undead
As a matter of fact, we can instead point to spell text that specifically says corpses are fueled by negative energy and not stolen/mistreated souls.
So, since no souls are involved, the next "go-to" in an attempt to explain things is to point out how the negative energy fueling these corpses has an evil and corrupting influence.
Except it doesn't:
Scroll down and notice that the Planes can come with an Alignment Trait or not. Now notice that the Negative Energy Plane lacks an Alignment Trait - because it is not a Good or Evil source of energy.
Also, as graystone pointed out earlier in the thread, pg9 of The Great Beyond flatly says:
"Known simply as the Void, the Negative Energy Plane empowers undead just as positive energy is the driving force behind all living things, but contrary to some religious dogma, neither it nor its destructive energies are evil. As dangerous and antithetical to life as they might be, they simply exist as an opposite to the creative potential of the positive, divorced from any notion of morality.
You'll notice this supported by the (very commonly pointed out) fact that other Negative Energy spells, such as Inflict Wounds, are not Alignment-tagged as "Evil."
Further evidence that not all undead are evil is the very alignment rules themselves:
"Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior. Dogs may be obedient and cats free-spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic."
This particularly applies to mindless undead such as skeletons and zombies because mindless creatures are, by their very nature, incapable of moral action.
Now, all that said, are undead always evil? Yes. Because they possess the "Evil" Alignment tag.
So what we're really left with is a contradiction within the rules that we, as players and GMs, have to content with and sort out on our own.
So the real question is, do we follow the tag and treat undead as evil always every time? Or do we follow the massive amount of other rules evidence that shows that tag is misplaced?
I'm going with the mountain of evidence rather than the tag, personally.
(And since JJ's comments on the forums are in direct contention with the up-to-date printed rules, he does not get the final say simply by being the Lead Designer; LDs can be wrong, after all.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
3. This thread assumes that Alignment in PF2, like in PF1, is largely objective rather than subjective. By this we mean that, while there are some exceptions to the rule, generally speaking, in Pathfinder, good and evil are non subjective terms.Inquiry: Who sets the objectives for objective good and evil? The creative director? The development team? Paizo as a whole (and if so, through what system do they settle disagreements)? Gary Gygax? HWalsh (there OP)? The current GM?On a case by case basis usually the Current GM following the examples given in the books. There are some things, however, that are actually just evil.
For example:
Spells with the Evil descriptor are evil.
Consuming the Flesh of an Angel? Automatically evil.
Why is consuming the flesh of an angel automatically evil? I know catholics are taught that they are eating the actual flesh of Jesus and drinking his actual blood every Sunday, could possibly be a similar situation, no?
|
It's in an AP. If you eat something offered to you, without knowing it is Angel meat. You instantly fall.
What AP? This sounds like one of those situations where there are mitigating factors to the situation that often get left out in discussions like this (for example, when one is offered mystery meat by known demons, one is not entirely innocent of the idea that it might be something terrible).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually don't know - I believe it is in WotR, but I am not at that part yet as a player and don't want to spoil it for myself. Someone spoiled it in a forum post.
See, that was my first thought. There's a perfect place for that to happen in that AP. But I did a word search in the PDF for both 'angel' and 'eat' and came up empty in regards to any events resembling this.
Are you sure they weren't just referring to something that happened in their own game?
Undead are evil because they do not poop. According to the holy text, Everybody Poops, this is an abomination of nature that must be destroyed. It is our duty to put these foul things down, to flush them from our land, and to wash our hands of their awful corruption!
yeah, this needed another thread...