D&D General A paladin just joined the group. I'm a necromancer.

[Iry]

Because I am getting sick of going around in circles.

Would it be easier to say that nobody plays RAW? Not even AL, which tries the hardest, can agree on every rule from one table to the next. Not Mike Mearls in his games, nor Chris Perkins in his games. Parts are always forgotten, interpreted one way instead of another way, or fudged on the fly to keep the game running.

 

[Flamestrike]

Would it be easier to say that nobody plays RAW?

And (as I have mentioned for literally all this thread) I have no issue with that. Play your games how you want.

I just want to see if I cant get some common ground with @Chaosmancer because we're otherwise running around in circles.

 

[Chaosmancer]

@Chaosmancer

Look man, can we agree on the following points:

1) The RAW states that animating the dead using necromancy magic is not a good act, and only evil people do so frequently (reference already provided)
2) The RAW on zombies and skeletons states the magic used to animate them is 'sinister and dark magic' that possess the corpse with a wholly evil spirit, that if uncontrolled goes on a murderous rampage, killing everything around it with no pity or remorse (reference already provided)
3) By RAW, zombies and skeletons are Evilly aligned (reference already provided)

and:

4) You accept the above as RAW, but you personally disagree with it being included as RAW in the first place, and would rule otherwise in games you run.

Is that a fair enough summation of where we sit?

Because I am getting sick of going around in circles.

RAW also allows that "dark and sinister magic" to be cast by someone channeling "holy and divine power". I've provided RAW examples of LG Gods that would allow this, backed up by reasoning as to why they might not see it that way.

A God of Sunshine and Healing can grant you Animate Dead by RAW. Animate Dead, which you say must be Dark and Sinister magic, even though the spell does not call it that, nor does the school of necromancy entry. You have to go to the Monster Manual to get that phrase.

Also, RAW, there are ways to summon good spirits of the dead. Multiple ways.

Also RAW, we have a type of zombie who uses the statblock, but that cannot logically be evil. Because there is no "dark and sinister magic" and no "evil spirit" to possess them. Still RAW, even though it contradicts the RAW you are quoting at me.


Also, just for giggles, nowhere in RAW does it state that mind controlling and violating the very sanctity of their mind is evil. Nothing in enchantment magic is called out like Animate Dead is, despite the fact that it is arguably more evil.

So, how about this. You agree that my RAW that contradicts your RAW is just as valid. That Clerics channel divine power of their gods, and that it is not dark and sinister, even though it may be used on the spell Animate Dead. That not all zombies are powered by evil spirits or evil magic.

Nothing about this debate is ever going to make me change my game (unless I come up with a cool idea) but homebrewing is not the problem. The problem is that you are taking a hard line stance (this is the only RAW that matters) when there is actually a lot of ambiguity here, because RAW contradicts RAW.

And your response to that has been to just repeat "No, this is RAW" even though I'm giving you RAW, I'm giving you straight info from the books on how things work, and they contradtict what you are saying. But you refuse to acknowledge that, you refuse to see that there is RAW that supports a different version of the spell. I don't know why, you can run the game how you like, with Animate Dead being an evil, horrible sin that only the most depraved do "frequently" (Like the necrophilia, pedophilia, torture, genocide, genital mutilation, and whatever else you've thrown out during this thread)

But when faced with contradictory RAW, I'm not going to just say you are right. I'm going to keep bringing up the fact that there is confusion here, and room for other interpretations.

 

[Flamestrike]

Blah blah blah

No, can you please confirm if you agree with the following:

1) The RAW states that animating the dead using necromancy magic is not a good act, and only evil people do so frequently (reference already provided)
2) The RAW on zombies and skeletons states the magic used to animate them is 'sinister and dark magic' that possess the corpse with a wholly evil spirit, that if uncontrolled goes on a murderous rampage, killing everything around it with no pity or remorse (reference already provided)
3) By RAW, zombies and skeletons are Evilly aligned (reference already provided)

and:

4) You accept the above as RAW, but you personally disagree with it being included as RAW in the first place, and would rule otherwise in games you run.

It's a Yes or No answer man.

I just want to see if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, or if we cant meet in the middle with some common ground.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No, can you please confirm if you agree with the following:

1) The RAW states that animating the dead using necromancy magic is not a good act, and only evil people do so frequently (reference already provided)
2) The RAW on zombies and skeletons states the magic used to animate them is 'sinister and dark magic' that possess the corpse with a wholly evil spirit, that if uncontrolled goes on a murderous rampage, killing everything around it with no pity or remorse (reference already provided)
3) By RAW, zombies and skeletons are Evilly aligned (reference already provided)

and:

4) You accept the above as RAW, but you personally disagree with it being included as RAW in the first place, and would rule otherwise in games you run.

It's a Yes or No answer man.

I just want to see if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, or if we cant meet in the middle with some common ground.

You want me to debate on your terms, but you won't acknowledge mine.

I also do not appreciate you reducing my post to "blah, blah, blah." If you wanted to shorten it for space you could have simply put SNIP.

But, since you did do so, I can only assume you didn't read my post, so I'll ask things in your manner,

1) Do you accept that RAW Clerics channel the power of their gods?

2) Do you accept that RAW the gods alignment determines the type of magic they grant their clerics?

3) Do you accept that RAW there exists a type of zombie, the Spore Zombie, which uses the Zombie statblock despite being animated by mold instead of magic or spirits?

4) Do you accept that by RAW, all molds presented in the Monster Manual are unaligned, because mold cannot be evil?

And

5) Do you accept that even if all of this is RAW you can play the game how you like anyways?

Yes or No please

 

[Flamestrike]

1) Do you accept that RAW Clerics channel the power of their gods?

Yes.

2) Do you accept that RAW the gods alignment determines the type of magic they grant their clerics?

Nope. RAW the Gods alignment has nothing to do with the 'type' of magic granted to their clerics. The Domain of the God determines spells granted (over and above the Cleric base spells).

Correct me if Im wrong, but I dont even think there is a distinction between 'divine' and 'arcane' magic anymore.

3) Do you accept that RAW there exists a type of zombie, the Spore Zombie, which uses the Zombie statblock despite being animated by mold instead of magic or spirits?

Yes.

4) Do you accept that by RAW, all molds presented in the Monster Manual are unaligned, because mold cannot be evil?

No. There isnt any molds in the MM. Oozes yes. Molds no.

5) Do you accept that even if all of this is RAW you can play the game how you like anyways?

Yes. I've literally been saying exactly that all darn thread! Play the game how you want to mate. Feel free in your own games to run things your way.

Yes or No please

Your turn. Questions above.

 

[Chaosmancer]

1) The RAW states that animating the dead using necromancy magic is not a good act, and only evil people do so frequently (reference already provided)

That is RAW as it written in the description for the School of Necromancy at the back of the PHB.

2) The RAW on zombies and skeletons states the magic used to animate them is 'sinister and dark magic' that possess the corpse with a wholly evil spirit, that if uncontrolled goes on a murderous rampage, killing everything around it with no pity or remorse (reference already provided)

3) By RAW, zombies and skeletons are Evilly aligned (reference already provided)

That is the RAW from the Monster Manual, but as I have stated with the Spore Zombie, it is not a complete picture of the RAw in regards to Zombies.

And, obviously I agree with 4, because I run anyways all the time.

Nope. RAW the Gods alignment has nothing to do with the 'type' of magic granted to their clerics. The Domain of the God determines spells granted (over and above the Cleric base spells).

Correct me if Im wrong, but I dont even think there is a distinction between 'divine' and 'arcane' magic anymore.

I believe there is actually. For example it says "Divine Magic, as the name suggests, is the power of the gods, flowing from them into the world" they also specify "the ability to cast cleric spells relies on devotion and an intuitive sense of the diety's wishes".

This tells me that the magic flows from the gods, and that its use in spells is from the wishes of the god. And, since we have "unholy magic" then I would imagine that the deities can also grant "holy magic". This seems most connected to their alignment, in RAW.

No. There isnt any molds in the MM. Oozes yes. Molds no.

Ah, apologies, under Fungus I thought there was a mold. They have the Gas Spore and two types of mushroom though. Must have been the Violet Fungus that I was thinking of.

Still, close enough?

 

[Flamestrike]

That is RAW

That is the RAW

And, obviously I agree with 4, because I run anyways all the time.

OK - so we agree that RAW, animating the dead is not a good act, and only evil casters do so frequently. The magic used is 'sinister and dark' and it imbues the corpse with an evil murderous spirit, that if uncontrolled kills indiscriminately without pity or remorse.

We also agree that in YOUR games (or anyone elses games for that matter) you are free to ignore that RAW.

We're finally getting somewhere.

This tells me that the magic flows from the gods, and that its use in spells is from the wishes of the god.

There is nothing inconsistent with a Good aligned God granting a Cleric the spell animate dead. It would be rare IMO (and it seems to be the case perusing the domains each God offers, with the majority of Gods who offer animate dead being... you know... evil).

In 5E DnD you can be an evilly aligned cleric of a Good god. So those evil Clerics of Osiris can use animate dead willy nilly if they want to. Osiris' neutral aligned Clerics dont care that the spell 'is not good' because neither are they, but even they wont use the spell frequetly (ore else they'd be evil). Osiris' majority Good aligned clerics would rarely use the spell (if at all) and if they did, they certainly wouldn't do so frequently.

Alignment doesnt really seem to matter to 5E Gods. Only that you stick to their interpretation of the Gods Dogma.

 

[Lanefan]

So then, in the context of Cap'n Kobold's "land mine analogy", we have an inconsistency. One is evil, the other is not, but both are equally dangerous in terms of "land mines"

So, you would agree that the analogy fails to stand up as a viable explanation?

Not entirely.

One - creating undead - is evil because it results in the creation of an inherently evil thing which, left to its own devices and not controlled or commanded, will commit evil acts. The very act of its creation is thus evil.

The other - creating a golem or construct - is not evil because it results in the creation of an inherently neutral thing which, left to its own devices and not controlled or commanded, will do nothing at all. The act of its creation is thus neutral.

Common to both is that the use to which each is ultimately put can be good or evil or neutral depending on the whim of the instructor; and part of this is the 'land mine' aspect.

Which means a Necromancer could very easily commit an evil act toward good ends by, say, creating undead and ordering them to shore up the river against the oncoming floods. Here it simply becomes a question of whether the ends justify the means.

 

[Lanefan]

So, creating a golem, telling it to defend a temple and leaving it there for a thousand years is neutral.

Creating an undead, telling it to defend a temple, and leaving it there for a thousand years is evil.

Yes to both.

The common end - guard the temple for a thousand years (kinda tricky when you need to reassert command of your undead ever day, but whatever) is what it is, and for this purpose cancels out.

The difference is that the actual act of creation is evil in one case (as said creation materially brings more evil into the world) and not the other; and that's the point here.