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

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.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It's in the PHB and it doesn't say it's "just" Mystra's Weave, just that's what it's known as in the Forgotten Realms. I mean it opens with "the worlds in the D&D multiverse".
doesn't change a thing. There is still a manual of the planes. If you want to argue about whether they should reference it then there is a conversation there.
 

log in or register to remove this ad





Game rules were written using Myths and legends which are all about what the Majority Believed back in the day. I wonder why the rules would tend to support majority opinions. LMAO
I'm not surprised, I just don't think it's the right way to go for the actual rules. Again, that's what settings are for.
 



I've always heard undead applying to corporeal dead like zombies, vampires, etc., etc. A vampire is undead but a ghost is a spirit.
Undead include ghosts, specters, shadows, and many other types of incorporeal spirits, especially if you include older editions (banshees, phantoms, slow shadows, etc). Even 1e and earlier included them on the Clerics Turning Undead table.
 

I'm not surprised, I just don't think it's the right way to go for the actual rules. Again, that's what settings are for.
but the settings that are the most popular got that way by adhering to the rules, written and unwritten in fantasy, myths and D&D. It's why fantasy games are more popular than scifi games. People feel like they understand fantasy. It's got history, myth and tons of things the are expected. Thus the problem that when you start trying to peel the rules back people tend to recoil or get turned off. I'd argue it's why most other games aren't as popular as D&D. D&D live's in the normalized MYTHICAL space people expect. Take that away and it loses a huge portion of it's appeal.
 

Remove ads

Top