You're not even making an effort to understand. LOL
What part am I not trying to understand? You seemed to emphasize that one was using the default because it was being created by a spell, and the other doesn't need to follow the default.
If you have some other point I'm missing, well, I'm missing it.
First, not all fluff is a rule. Most of it isn't, really. Second, even if it was, I've proven that you aren't.
No, you proved that RAW is conflicting. Not the same thing
The spell specifically says to use the statblock, so to go outside of that isn't RAW with regard to the spell. I guess you aren't getting that the spell uses two different sets of rules. 1) The spell, and 2) Zombie stat block.
Ok. So, they spell says to use the statblock. It does not call out the zombie as being evil.
New Rule section: The statblock says zombies are evil, but the rules of monster alignment allow that to be changed.
So, by RAW, the spell could create non-evil zombies. Because we are talking about two different sets of rules. And, I actually argued this exact same point. I argued that the spell and the monster statblock did not match up completely, allowing it to be more likely that the spell created non-evil versions of the monster.
The response I got in exchange, was that the statblock said zombies were evil, therefore the spell creates evil zombies.
So, you are arguing something I said in defense of RAW non-evil Animate Dead, which you previously argued against.
You aren't bound by the RAW of the Spell, so you can use the other rules in the MM for placement of encounters. If you use the spell, the spell RAW dictating the use of the statblock comes into play as well.
I'm sorry, which part of the RAW of the spell says that we can't use the other rules of the MM that effect monster statblocks?
The spell says nothing about the monster created being evil. You are claiming that the spell dictates we can only use the statblock as written, but the rules of statblocks allow us to alter the alignment of the creature.
If we can do it RAW for one creature, we can do it RAW for another.
If you say that we cannot change the alignment of the undead created by the spell by RAW, then we need to know why that the rules for alignment within the MM do not apply to all monsters equally.
I guess I just have a better understanding of the rules than you do. No worries.
If you want to assume a superior position, feel free to make yourself a nice place. But if you can't back up your arguments, then you don't.
False. Rules, you know, interact with each other. They don't exist in isolation If you don't know that, it explains your problems with this thread.
Yes, rules interact with each other.
So why are you trying to isolate the rules of Animate Dead and not allow them to interact with the other rules in the game?
My position is quite literally to allow the rules for Animate Dead to interact with the rules for alignment in the Monster Manual. Your position is that these rules cannot interact. You are arguing for isolation, not me.
I don't know. Why should they?
You are the one arguing they aren't evil. You are the one with the burden of proof here.
The position was "these orcs are evil, the default says they are evil" you are the one who jumped up and said that was wrong. You are the one who needs to prove your case.
They can assume evil all they want. Being evil doesn't give you license to just hack them down, though. Do that without justification and you are evil, too.
Self Defense.
You know, there even is a section of law for self defense that allows you to act under the reasonable assumption that the person you are fighting is an imminent threat to your life.
Orcs are an imminent threat to the life of the party who comes upon them. Because the default orc is evil and will attack them.
Since that fluff isn't a rule, it's up to you the DM to decide.
Rulings over rules(or in this case fluff), man. You get to decide how conflicts resolve. You are well within your rights to declare that orcs never make alliances and effectively remove half-orcs as a race and make them singular exceptions or say they don't exist at all.
You seem to keep forgetting that I am a DM. When I was arguing for a RAW way to make undead non-evil. I was a DM, here, talking about the RAW lore and rules for orcs? I am a DM.
When I presented the conflict between the RAW of undead, I was told that I was free to change it, but RAW was that they were evil.
Now, when you are presented with a conflict between RAW for orcs, you are still saying I'm free to change it, but that I probably shouldn't follow RAW in making them evil.
What is the difference here?