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

[Maxperson]

And while I have looked at the monster manual, repeatedly, I still contend that if we want to talk about the creation of undead, the fact that none of that makes its way into the actual act of creating the undead gives us options. The spell Animate Dead does not say you must use an evil spirit. Therefore, I do not see why I must use an evil spirit?

If they weren't always evil in 5e, then the rule would not be that casters that cast animate dead and similar spells often are evil.

You can change it for your game, but the default in 5e is that it is in an evil act to use that spell.

 

[Flamestrike]

You can change it for your game, but the default in 5e is that it is in an evil act to use that spell.

This has been explained literally dozens of times in this thread, with direct citations to the rules.

Expect some kind of circular argument coming straight back at you.

 

[Maxperson]

This has been explained literally dozens of times in this thread, with direct citations to the rules.

Expect some kind of circular argument coming straight back at you.

There has been no explanation that invalidates it. Just some assumptions that alignment cannot change or be viewed differently, because written on character sheet. That doesn't work. What is written down on a sheet does not bind the DM.

 

[Flamestrike]

There has been no explanation that invalidates it. Just some assumptions that alignment cannot change or be viewed differently, because written on character sheet.

Only a whiny entitled player would sook about the DM telling them erase their LG alignment and put 'Evil' in there after (say) committing a mass murder.

If said player complained they get a quick explanation and a dont argue. If they persisted, they get shown the door.

Not enough whiny self entitled players get smacked down by DMs IMO. Its a disservice to that player. He winds up thinking that sort of behaviour is justified or appropriate. I wouldnt tolerate it from a friend in a Poker game, or a friendly game of backyard football, and I wont tolerate it from people I invite into my roleplaying games either.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If they weren't always evil in 5e, then the rule would not be that casters that cast animate dead and similar spells often are evil.

You can change it for your game, but the default in 5e is that it is in an evil act to use that spell.

They must be evil because the rule says people who do it are evil, even though the actual rules for the spell give no indication that it is evil.

LG Cleric of LG god has his gods permission to cast the spell (otherwise they wouldn't give it to them) using their divine LG magic.

Still evil because people who cast the spell are evil.

Gets permission, uses a good spirit, does not create a murder machine because the spell does not match up with the lore in the MM, uses the undead for good deeds.

Still evil because people who cast the spell are evil.


You can see why this is a problem right? I've pointed out dozens of holes in the arguments of why the spell must be evil, and the last bastion left for that logic is "it is evil because it is evil" and that is not a good position to argue morality from. It is because it is is just blind faith.

There is no requirement that zombies (and by logical extension skeletons) must be evil simply because we use the statblock. The spell does not state it is using evil magic. There is no reason to assume that the corpse we are using would be offended by the usage of the magic, and might have even requested it. Nothing in the spell says that the undead will kill the living if left uncontrolled. The book goes out of its way to say that necromancers are not evil by default. The book provides us with LG and LN dieties who per their lore and mechanics would be fine with the creation of undead.

Yet, a single line says "people who cast Animate Dead too often are evil" and therefore none of the rest of it matters?

A paragraph's worth of evidence is entirely negated by a single sentence that has no support?

Only a whiny entitled player would sook about the DM telling them erase their LG alignment and put 'Evil' in there after (say) committing a mass murder.

Mass Murder of whom?

I could see a Druid being a little miffed if you change them from LG to LE just because they cast Storm of Vengeance on an enemy army. That is mass murder after all.

Or how about when the Paladin fights through 60 GOO cultists to stop a ritual that the cult leader was performing to gain more power. Still mass murder.


This is the problem I keep bringing up. Players commit "evil" acts all the time, but because of the context, the reason why they are doing it, we don't blink an eye. Because context matters.

Killing hundreds of children is wrong right?
How about destroying a brine pool full of hundreds of mind flayer tadpoles, killing them, still going to mark the players as Evil for that? They are still children, mindflayers are intelligent, sentient beings.

But, context matters.

 

[Maxperson]

They must be evil because the rule says people who do it are evil, even though the actual rules for the spell give no indication that it is evil.

The rules for the spell don't have to. It's pretty abhorrent to people in general to desecrate the dead, and when those desecrated dead come back as evil, it's even worse. It's pretty self-evident that it's an evil spell.

LG Cleric of LG god has his gods permission to cast the spell (otherwise they wouldn't give it to them) using their divine LG magic.

It's a pretty poor example of RP for a LG cleric to even request that spell. The ends don't justify the means for a LG individual.

Still evil because people who cast the spell are evil.

It's evil because it desecrates the dead and creates evil undead.

Gets permission, uses a good spirit, does not create a murder machine because the spell does not match up with the lore in the MM, uses the undead for good deeds.

Still evil because people who cast the spell are evil.

You can see why this is a problem right?

There is no problem.

So what if the rules have a hole in them to allow a player to have abysmal RP and request the spell from a LG deity. It would be waaaaaaaaay too complex for the developers to go spell by spell for each god to let you know what they will or will not grant their clerics. They leave it to the players to exercise discretion and not have their LG cleric request an evil spell and use it.

There is no requirement that zombies (and by logical extension skeletons) must be evil simply because we use the statblock.

Unless you homebrew the statblock to say something else, it does in fact require zombies to be evil. Short of you changing the game, zombies are evil. The statblock shows that. The spell says you use the evil stat block. That's the default.

The book goes out of its way to say that necromancers are not evil by default. The book provides us with LG and LN dieties who per their lore and mechanics would be fine with the creation of undead.

Yep. There are in fact non-evil necromancy spells for non-evil necromancers. Evil spells don't become non-evil just because you wish it to be so. The game itself dictates by name that if you use animate dead a lot, you are evil, because.....drum roll.....

"Creating the undead through the use of necromancy spells such as animate dead is not a good act, and only evil casters use such spells frequently."

Yet, a single line says "people who cast Animate Dead too often are evil" and therefore none of the rest of it matters?

You have yet to actually prove your case.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The rules for the spell don't have to. It's pretty abhorrent to people in general to desecrate the dead, and when those desecrated dead come back as evil, it's even worse. It's pretty self-evident that it's an evil spell.

Go back and read the thread please, we have discussed this already.

1) We have no evidence to support this as a desecration
2) We have no evidence that people would be against returning as undead ("You mean that after I die I could still fight to protect my wife and children from the Horde? Yes sir, I'll join the Undying Legions if I die in battle)
3) We have no evidence that undead are automatically evil, so those who return would not automatically be evil

So, it is self-evident if you decide it does not require any evidence.

It's a pretty poor example of RP for a LG cleric to even request that spell. The ends don't justify the means for a LG individual.

You are assuming the means are evil. Osiris and Anubis are not evil gods, they exist in FR, and the mythology they are based on say that people becoming mummified to protect the body and after life of the pharaoh for all eternity to be an honor. Every aspect of the ritual of mummification was blessed by the gods, and the gods were good.

So, if the proccess of creating undead is blessed by the gods you are using good means to accomplish good ends. That cannot be evil.

Unless you homebrew the statblock to say something else, it does in fact require zombies to be evil. Short of you changing the game, zombies are evil. The statblock shows that. The spell says you use the evil stat block. That's the default.

1) All alignments in the statblocks are mutable, as per the MM itself on page 7. While it may be the default, it is meant to be changed to reflect the story of the individual.

2) The Spore Zombie from Ravinica also uses the Zombie statblock. It does not use dark magic, dark spirits, or anything else listed in the zombie lore. It uses mold that the Druid controls. Mold, cannot be evil. Therefore we have evidence to support a non-evil zombie being used by players, despite them also saying to use the statblock labeled zombie.

3) The limits presented within the spell are presented within the zombie or skeleton statblocks. Notice, nothing within those statblocks says that the monsters require a bonus action command from the necromancer controlling them. A limit the spells specifically provides. A PC necromancer cannot order two different groups of undead to do different things in a single turn. An NPC necromancer can. Why? Because they are using two different types of undead seems to be a very reasonable explanation. Notice that the lore on the creatures says that they will attack the living unless commanded not to. Read the spell, it says that if you have given no commands (commands = zero) then the undead will stand there and do nothing, except defend itself. It does not, in fact, attack the living in the absence of commands.


So, alignments in the statblock are meant to be changed. The game already provides us with an example of a PC creating an undead where the undead is not evil. We have solid evidence that the undead created by Animate Dead follow different rules than the ones in the MM.

I don't even need to homebrew the statblock it seems, there is quite a bit of evidence to support my position.

It's evil because it desecrates the dead and creates evil undead.

Still evil because people who cast the spell are evil.

There is no problem.

So what if the rules have a hole in them to allow a player to have abysmal RP and request the spell from a LG deity. It would be waaaaaaaaay too complex for the developers to go spell by spell for each god to let you know what they will or will not grant their clerics. They leave it to the players to exercise discretion and not have their LG cleric request an evil spell and use it.

Yep. There are in fact non-evil necromancy spells for non-evil necromancers. Evil spells don't become non-evil just because you wish it to be so. The game itself dictates by name that if you use animate dead a lot, you are evil, because.....drum roll.....

"Creating the undead through the use of necromancy spells such as animate dead is not a good act, and only evil casters use such spells frequently."

Sigh.

Well, if you wish to continue refuting evidence to the contrary, or don't care that there is no evidence to that supports your claim. then there is no point in continuing is there?

You can't argue my actual points, you can't disprove my points, you are just going to continue forward with no care for the logic, only the declaration that you are right.

You have yet to actually prove your case.

How much more evidence do I need for reasonable doubt? I have multiple sources, multiple reasons, and all of it RAW.

You have a single declaration with holes in it.

 

[Maxperson]

Go back and read the thread please, we have discussed this already.

1) We have no evidence to support this as a desecration

You honestly think your best friend would be fine with you bringing his dead wife back as a zombie?

2) We have no evidence that people would be against returning as undead ("You mean that after I die I could still fight to protect my wife and children from the Horde? Yes sir, I'll join the Undying Legions if I die in battle)

You think they would volunteer to be evil and go around killing indiscriminately once they break free?

3) We have no evidence that undead are automatically evil, so those who return would not automatically be evil

Nice Strawman. We aren't talking about undead. We are talking about zombies which by RAW are evil.

So, it is self-evident if you decide it does not require any evidence.

ROFL

You are assuming the means are evil. Osiris and Anubis are not evil gods, they exist in FR, and the mythology they are based on say that people becoming mummified to protect the body and after life of the pharaoh for all eternity to be an honor. Every aspect of the ritual of mummification was blessed by the gods, and the gods were good.

This is part of the Egyptian philosophy

"Respect for the dead was a primary part of maat and the life of an Egyptian. To undertake any action which might be seen as disrespectful to the dead was to risk the anger of the gods."

They were lain in state and with respect. Yanking them back to be a zombie horde is going to anger them.

1) All alignments in the statblocks are mutable, as per the MM itself on page 7. While it may be the default, it is meant to be changed to reflect the story of the individual.

Yes, the DM can create a homebrew zombie. What part of that disagrees with me that the default is evil and you can homebrew a different alignment?

2) The Spore Zombie from Ravinica also uses the Zombie statblock. It does not use dark magic, dark spirits, or anything else listed in the zombie lore. It uses mold that the Druid controls. Mold, cannot be evil. Therefore we have evidence to support a non-evil zombie being used by players, despite them also saying to use the statblock labeled zombie.

All you have is evidence that if you have a homebrew zombie, it's a homebrew zombie. Nothing there indicates that the default zombie, which the spell uses, isn't evil.

3) The limits presented within the spell are presented within the zombie or skeleton statblocks. Notice, nothing within those statblocks says that the monsters require a bonus action command from the necromancer controlling them. A limit the spells specifically provides. A PC necromancer cannot order two different groups of undead to do different things in a single turn. An NPC necromancer can. Why? Because they are using two different types of undead seems to be a very reasonable explanation. Notice that the lore on the creatures says that they will attack the living unless commanded not to. Read the spell, it says that if you have given no commands (commands = zero) then the undead will stand there and do nothing, except defend itself. It does not, in fact, attack the living in the absence of commands.

You can engage in weak justifications all you like. None of that changes the fact that RAW says that if you use animate dead a lot, you are evil.

So, alignments in the statblock are meant to be changed.

Incorrect. It CAN be changed, if you homebrew the creature. That's different from meant to be changed.

I don't even need to homebrew the statblock it seems, there is quite a bit of evidence to support my position.

Your "evidence" is homebrew stuff.

Well, if you wish to continue refuting evidence to the contrary, or don't care that there is no evidence to that supports your claim. then there is no point in continuing is there?

No, there is no point in continuing. You homebrew your zombies. It works for you. Keep at it. Have fun man.

You can't argue my actual points, you can't disprove my points, you are just going to continue forward with no care for the logic, only the declaration that you are right.

The only real point you've made is "Homebrew = homebrew."

 

[Chaosmancer]

You honestly think your best friend would be fine with you bringing his dead wife back as a zombie?

Depends on circumstances. After all, as was discussed at the very beginning of this thread, the body isn't the person. So, maybe they would be okay with it.

Actually, my best friend would think the whole thing is metal and would make sure I agreed to bring him back as a zombie too.

You think they would volunteer to be evil and go around killing indiscriminately once they break free?

Considering we have no evidence to support that is guaranteed to be the case? You are side-stepping the point.

And, even if they are going to follow the zombie rules, they might still volunteer for the duty for the honor of their country, and be placed in a position where the only living things they should encounter are the enemy.

So again, yes. Especially since we have no solid evidence that they are evil or will go around killing anybody.

Nice Strawman. We aren't talking about undead. We are talking about zombies which by RAW are evil.

Okay, so you don't want to try and defend "all undead are evil" because that is a losing proposition. Instead, all zombies are evil.

Except that they aren't. Spore Zombies aren't evil despite using the statblock, and the statblock specifically allows for the alignment to be changed based on the discretion of the DM and the situation. So, RAW, zombies are not necessarily evil.

Yet again.

ROFL

Laugh if you want, but your points are pretty clearly heavily biased despite evidence. Heck, just asking "so your friend would be okay coming back as an evil creature? No? Then clearly the creature is evil" is circular reasoning at its worst.

No evidence matters, because "Evil it is because it is Evil" is your go to response.

This is part of the Egyptian philosophy

"Respect for the dead was a primary part of maat and the life of an Egyptian. To undertake any action which might be seen as disrespectful to the dead was to risk the anger of the gods."

They were lain in state and with respect. Yanking them back to be a zombie horde is going to anger them.

And yet, the very ritual which mummified them, was supposed to include the mummy coming to life to defend the tomb.

Were the priests of the Gods angering the Gods by doing so? When they asked the gods to bless the mummies so that they may stand eternal vigil against grave robbers who would incur the wrath of the gods, did this cause the wrath of the gods?

Oh, and remember, all Mummies are evil too. Despite Osiris himself being a mummy, and also being an LG god (I brought this up before, but you seem uninterested in reading back through the thread)


Assuming then that the act of creating undead would not be anathema to the pantheon, because it was part of their burial practices, then the act itself cannot be evil. There must be circumstances.

Yes, the DM can create a homebrew zombie. What part of that disagrees with me that the default is evil and you can homebrew a different alignment?

It is step one on the path, see below for step 2

All you have is evidence that if you have a homebrew zombie, it's a homebrew zombie. Nothing there indicates that the default zombie, which the spell uses, isn't evil.

Except, the Spore Zombie is not a homebrew zombie. (Yes, it is a Ravinica zombie, which is a setting specific zombie, which you consider homebrew, but that is not the point). The rules for the Spore Zombie specifically say " The creature uses the zombie stat block in the Monster Manual." Which is exactly the same thing that the spell Animate Dead says.

So, here we have a zombie that says "use the statblock" and we know it cannot be Evil. Unless you can explain why Mold is evil.

So, we have reason to show that "use the statblock" does not mean it is a carbon copy of the same creature. This is step two which leads to step three.

You can engage in weak justifications all you like. None of that changes the fact that RAW says that if you use animate dead a lot, you are evil.

All of my "weak justifications" are evidence that the Zombie from the Spell Animate Dead is not the same as the Zombie in the Monster Manual. They follow different rules, they act in different manners, their only similarity is using the same statblock.

And, as the spore zombie shows, using the same statblock does not mean you are using the same creature.

So, by RAW, their is evidence that the zombie you are summonig with animate dead is not the same as the zombie statblock.

But, of course, "it is evil because it is evil" is your response to this.

Incorrect. It CAN be changed, if you homebrew the creature. That's different from meant to be changed.

Your "evidence" is homebrew stuff.

No, there is no point in continuing. You homebrew your zombies. It works for you. Keep at it. Have fun man.

The only real point you've made is "Homebrew = homebrew."

Right, because everything not in the player's handbook is homebrew.

Except Osiris and Anubis being okay with undead comes from the players handbook.
So do the rules for animate dead
So does a lot of my evidence.

The only "homebrew" is to point out that using the statblock is not the same as using the creature entire. And, since nothing else in the PHB says to use the zombie statblock, I have to go to other sources.

But, if you wish to stay with "it is evil because it is evil, and therefore it is evil" then that is your right. I can't make you use logic.

 

[Maxperson]

Considering we have no evidence to support that is guaranteed to be the case? You are side-stepping the point.

If you don't consider the MM that says that the stat block is the default evidence, there's nothing more to talk about.

Enjoy your home brew. We're done.