D&D 5E Why is animate dead considered inherently evil?

[Tolerable Tyrant]

I'm having a troublesome time understanding why the animate dead spell is considered evil. When I read the manual it states that the spall imbues the targeted corpse with a foul mimicry of life, implying that the soul is not a sentient being who is trapped in a decaying corpse. Rather, the spell does exactly what its title suggests, it only animates the corps. Now of course one could use the spell to create zombies that would hunt and kill humans, but by that same coin, they could create a labor force that needs no form of sustenance (other than for the spell to be recast of course). There have also been those who have said "the spell is associated with the negative realm which is evil", however when you ask someone why the negative realm is bad that will say "because it is used for necromancy", I'm sure you can see the fallacy in this argument.

However, I must take into account that I have only looked into the DnD magic system since yesterday so there are likely large gaps in my knowledge. PS(Apon further reflection I've decided that the animate dead spell doesn't fall into the school of necromancy, as life is not truly given to the corps, instead I believe this would most likely fall into the school of transmutation.) PPS(I apologize for my sloppy writing, I've decided I'm feeling too lazy to correct it.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because corpses are icky and icky things are evil. The 'killing spree if uncontrolled' was tacked on later in 3.5.

Now why don't you just brutally enslave an elemental spirit into a golem instead like a Good person would?

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

I heard one theory that says your putting a negative plane entity into a body and those things all hate us with a passion.

1: I don't believe animate dead is associated with the negative realm because it's a "foul mimicry of life" not a controlled spirit. 2: if it was, does that mean beings from the negative realm aren't sentient?

 

[Mythos Enthusiast]

Because corpses are icky and icky things are evil. The 'killing spree if uncontrolled' was tacked on later in 3.5.

Now why don't you just brutally enslave an elemental spirit into a golem instead like a Good person would?

This is a very interesting point - that golems don't at all have the air/flavor of being unholy because they require the violation/enslavement of some other entity.

If I had to guess, it's because OG golems in cultural mythology, I don't think, worked that way? And that the whole 'elemental spirit' thing was added later to give some plausibility of how golems worked beyond just magic.

Regardless of why, it's definitely glossed over in it's representation/ramifications in the D&D lore.

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

I think its because if you lose control of your labor force, the undead go around slaughtering everyone.

I did bring this up in my original post, they would of course need high maintenance but I believe the benefits far outweigh the risks.

 

[Mind of tempest]

This is a very interesting point - that golems don't at all have the air/flavor of being unholy because they require the violation/enslavement of some other entity.

If I had to guess, it's because OG golems in cultural mythology, I don't think, worked that way? And that the whole 'elemental spirit' thing was added later to give some plausibility of how golems worked beyond just magic.

golems worked on some kind of letter magic by particularly holy rabbis last I heard.

 

[Lyxen]

It was not the case in all editions,. In particular 3e had neutral "mindless" undead like skeletons and zombies, and animating these was not considered inherently evil.

However, 5e decided that negative energy had to be involved, and that negative energy was inherently evil, so by direct implication, all undead, including "mindless" ones are evil and producing them is evil.

This is the RAW answer, but nothing prevents you from using other takes in your setting. However, if your DM tells you that it's so, then it is in his setting and in his games...

 

[Vaalingrade]

This is a very interesting point - that golems don't at all have the air/flavor of being unholy because they require the violation/enslavement of some other entity.

D&D has never considered enslavement, or violation of agency to be evil. That's why mind control spells and love potions aren't evil despite being WAY worse than making a meat robot.

 

[Mind of tempest]

D&D has never considered enslavement, or violation of agency to be evil. That's why mind control spells and love potions aren't evil despite being WAY worse than making a meat robot.

It has always made me question what good even is if those things are not evil?

 

[Mythos Enthusiast]

D&D has never considered enslavement, or violation of agency to be evil. That's why mind control spells and love potions aren't evil despite being WAY worse than making a meat robot.

When i first started playing 3.5 way back in the day, one of my first "I'm the DM moments" was to explain to my group that enchantment magic was seen as equally evil as necromancy by the in-world populace for this exact reason, (and, really, arguably more so in a lot of ways).

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

I think its because if you lose control of your labor force, the undead go around slaughtering everyone.

However, I did forget to mention that the workforce would be made in specific formations, to maximize productivity and minimize threats.