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

[Chaosmancer]

Evil is subjective. What is evil to one person, may not be evil to someone else. Society, not individuals determines what good and evil are, though.

Let's go back to murder vs. execution. A dictator makes the law, so he can make executions of political rivals for nothing more than being a rival, legal. Modern societies(even his own) will view that as evil, though, so even though it isn't murder, it is still evil.

Thank you

My above argument fails when it comes to D&D. Good and evil in D&D are objective truths, not subjective or relative. Animate Dead will always be evil unless the DM changes that through homebrew.

HEAD-DESK

Then explain how a lawful good diety can have lawful good clerics while still promoting the use of Animate Dead. The PHB gives us that the Death Domain, while normally reserved for evil clerics, can be taken by good clerics of specific death gods in the Egyptian Pantheon of the PHB.

The Death Domain gives Animate Dead as a domain spell. It is as vital to the beliefs of the diety involved as Beacon of Hope for Life Clerics, Identify for Knowledge Clerics, Call Lightning for Tempest Clerics, or Disguise Self for Trickery Clerics.

No homebrew, this is straight PHB.

Evil is objective.
Animate Dead is Evil.
Good Dieties approve of the use of Animate Dead

This doesn't work. This is a logical paradox. You can't have good Death Domain clerics if Animate Dead is always evil, but the PHB tells us that you can see Good Aligned Death Clerics of Good Aligned Deities.

 

[Maxperson]

Then explain how a lawful good diety can have lawful good clerics while still promoting the use of Animate Dead. The PHB gives us that the Death Domain, while normally reserved for evil clerics, can be taken by good clerics of specific death gods in the Egyptian Pantheon of the PHB.

I already did. Pages ago. It would be too complicated and not worth the effort to give each deity individualized spell lists. The god of Harvest wouldn't give access to Blight for instance. The god is about successful harvest, not famine. Instead, the designers rely on you to have common sense and not try to animate dead if you follow a LG deity.

The Death Domain gives Animate Dead as a domain spell. It is as vital to the beliefs of the diety involved as Beacon of Hope for Life Clerics, Identify for Knowledge Clerics, Call Lightning for Tempest Clerics, or Disguise Self for Trickery Clerics.

See above. Most gods of death are evil. The existence of a few rare exceptions does not warrant a change to the domain. Use common sense and you won't be having these issues.

No homebrew, this is straight PHB.

Correct. It's not homebrew to go completely against the RP of the LG cleric and the LG god to cast Animate Dead. It's just horrible RP that ignores common sense. Nor is it homebrew that Animate Dead exists on the death domain list.

Evil is objective.

True.

Animate Dead is Evil.

True.

Good Dieties approve of the use of Animate Dead

False.

This doesn't work. This is a logical paradox. You can't have good Death Domain clerics if Animate Dead is always evil, but the PHB tells us that you can see Good Aligned Death Clerics of Good Aligned Deities.

Correct. It doesn't work. Of course, it's only a problem if you ignore common sense and/or go against the RP of your PC and his god.

Also, you can occasionally use Animate Dead without being evil yourself.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

So, there is a difference. Ending the life of someone can be good, neutral, or evil depending on the context surrounding the event.

Indeed. That is why I had to define murder as a specifically evil subset of killing in general.

Killing is fine if it is in the defense of other people. Murder is never in the defense of other people. I'd be curious to talk about assassination, which is still premeditated killing, but can be for the benefit of people or the detriment of people.

Assassination in defence of others - probably not evil. Assassination to advance yourself, for example politically or for payment. - evil (effectively murder.)

But this is the point. Context matters when determining if an act is good or evil.

I disagree. Some acts like murder are always evil, but it is the context that determines whether a killing is murder or not.
Likewise using the Animate dead spell isn't necessarily evil, but using it to create Skeletons or zombies is.

I'd ask why creating undead is always evil, but you will tell me to read the monster manual.

I'd tell you to read the PHB first. The PHB gives the fact that animating skeletons etc is evil, the MM gives context as to why that might be the case.

Then I will point out that the monster manual does not match the rules given for undead in the spell. You will then just say "but they are the same and if you want to change it talk to your DM, because creating undead is evil"

Could you explain why you think that the monster manual does not match the rules given for undead in the spell please? It looks like the thread has moved on a ways since I last read it.

I believe that when the spell tells you that the DM has the creature's game statistics, it is probably referring to its entry in the MM. (As opposed to just the statblock in the PHB for example.)
If you interpret that text differently, then that is just as valid at your table as my interpretation is at mine. If the whole discussion is just rooted in semantics, then having and implementing your own opinion is fine.

 

[Maxperson]

Assassination in defence of others - probably not evil. Assassination to advance yourself, for example politically or for payment. - evil (effectively murder.)

You can't assassinate in defense of others. If the person you are killing is in the process of trying to kill someone, it's not an assassination. If they are not in the process of trying to kill someone, it's defense of another, even if that person will try in the future to kill someone.

Likewise using the Animate dead spell isn't necessarily evil, but using it to create Skeletons or zombies is.

Animate dead only has two uses. 1) to create Skeletons or Zombies, 2) to reassert control over Skeletons or Zombies that you have previously created with the spell. I'd still peg the latter as evil. Using evil minions is an evil act in my opinion.

Could you explain why you think that the monster manual does not match the rules given for undead in the spell please? It looks like the thread has moved on a ways since I last read it.

He has argued that the non-evil homebrew zombies from Eberron and that the MM suggests that you can homebrew creatures by altering their alignments somehow means that the Animate Dead default doesn't apply.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I already did. Pages ago. It would be too complicated and not worth the effort to give each deity individualized spell lists. The god of Harvest wouldn't give access to Blight for instance. The god is about successful harvest, not famine. Instead, the designers rely on you to have common sense and not try to animate dead if you follow a LG deity.

See above. Most gods of death are evil. The existence of a few rare exceptions does not warrant a change to the domain. Use common sense and you won't be having these issues.

Correct. It's not homebrew to go completely against the RP of the LG cleric and the LG god to cast Animate Dead. It's just horrible RP that ignores common sense. Nor is it homebrew that Animate Dead exists on the death domain list.

True.
True.
False.

Correct. It doesn't work. Of course, it's only a problem if you ignore common sense and/or go against the RP of your PC and his god.

Also, you can occasionally use Animate Dead without being evil yourself.

I am using common sense, you seem to be missing it.

A Good god of Death has Animate Dead as a domain spell, something they expressly okay their followers using. Something that is as core to their beliefs as illusions are to trickery deities.

I've explained why the RP of the god could allow for the raising of undead, because it makes perfect sense considering the context of the diety we are discussing.

So, not ignoring the RP, not going against it.

So, why is it then impossible for Animate Dead to be neutral? Seriously? I've laid out the differences between the spell and the monster manual. No one is saying I am wrong about those differences, and they paint a very solid defense that the two versions are different. We know you can use the statblock without having to copy the alignment. We have gods that would okay the practice for good purposes. And good and evil are objective. A good diety would never okay the use of evil magic. That goes against the grain of their very being. Which lends credence to the theory that the act itself can be neutral.

What more evidence do I need to provide here? I'm not even going for "Animate Dead is good" I just want acknowledgement that it can be neutral, that the context of casting the spell is important in deciding if it is an evil act or not.

I'm truly at a loss here. I've got so much evidence that no one is denying exists, and yet you refuse to acknowledge any of it, simply saying that it must be wrong, because Animate Dead is always evil.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I disagree. Some acts like murder are always evil, but it is the context that determines whether a killing is murder or not.

See, you are mixing definitions here and that makes it difficult to show the real point.

"Murder is always evil, killing isn't" ignores that fact that the act of murder is the same physical act as killing. They are the same action. The context around the physical action is the difference between them.

Likewise using the Animate dead spell isn't necessarily evil, but using it to create Skeletons or zombies is.

Considering the Animate Dead spell can only be used to create Skeletons or Zombies, you need to be more specific on what you intend to say here. If you are agreeing that creating an undead is not always evil, then I agree.

Could you explain why you think that the monster manual does not match the rules given for undead in the spell please? It looks like the thread has moved on a ways since I last read it.

A Summary

A necromancer controlling Zombies and Skeletons from the MM does not need to use a bonus action to command them. The spell requires that you use a bonus action to command them.

The MM zombies and skeletons can have multiple orders. For example, you could command one group of zombies to close the door while another group charges the adventurers. The spell disallows this, all undead under your control must follow the same command as a group.

The MM states that you must issue a command to the undead to prevent them from attacking the living. The spell says that without a command, they stand motionless and only act to defend themselves.

As an addendum to that point, the order to not attack the living would then be null when you give any other command, because as pointed out, the undead of the spell can only follow a single command at a time.

This is all in addition to the points I have told you before, such as the spell making no mention of dark magic, evil spirits, or the losing control leading to murder.

I believe that when the spell tells you that the DM has the creature's game statistics, it is probably referring to its entry in the MM. (As opposed to just the statblock in the PHB for example.)
If you interpret that text differently, then that is just as valid at your table as my interpretation is at mine. If the whole discussion is just rooted in semantics, then having and implementing your own opinion is fine.

And that is an assumption that we can show is not always true.

Heck, even taking a different spell. Animate Object does not get you an Animated Sword or a Rug of Smothering. The spell Create Homunculus actually added abilities to the Homunculus in the Monster Manual, allowing you to increase it's health which is something the original monster could not do.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

You can't assassinate in defense of others. If the person you are killing is in the process of trying to kill someone, it's not an assassination. If they are not in the process of trying to kill someone, it's defense of another, even if that person will try in the future to kill someone.

You can kill someone to try to protect others that they are harming, even if they're not in the process of stabbing people when you kill them. Removing an evil tyrant who was implementing policies of putting people to death for example. Its political enough that I'd still consider it assassination, but the DM might judge that there was enough justification for it in defence of others that it wouldn't be considered an evil act.

Animate dead only has two uses. 1) to create Skeletons or Zombies, 2) to reassert control over Skeletons or Zombies that you have previously created with the spell. I'd still peg the latter as evil. Using evil minions is an evil act in my opinion.

Its only creating the undead that is specifically called out as not good in the rules however.
Depending upon the use to which you put the minions, I think that there are non-evil uses. Its just a pity that you can only use the spell to control undead that you have created.

He has argued that the non-evil homebrew zombies from Eberron and that the MM suggests that you can homebrew creatures by altering their alignments somehow means that the Animate Dead default doesn't apply.

There seems to be some confusion over the undead under discussion - such as the skeletons and zombies from animate dead - and undead in general.
In Eberron, Skeletons and Zombies are still evil, and will still try to kill the living unless controlled or otherwise limited. They are one of the few creatures (alongside fiends and celestials etc) whose alignment is still fixed.
There are other creatures classified as undead, such as the Undying, whose alignment is not fixed. But you can't create those as a character outside of DM intervention anyway. - At which point; homebrew, just as you say.

 

[Maxperson]

So, why is it then impossible for Animate Dead to be neutral?

It's not! You just have to homebrew it to be neutral in your game.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

See, you are mixing definitions here and that makes it difficult to show the real point.

"Murder is always evil, killing isn't" ignores that fact that the act of murder is the same physical act as killing. They are the same action. The context around the physical action is the difference between them.

Casting Animate dead is the same action. Doing it for the purpose of creating undead is evil. For the purpose of controlling undead - I would say - isn't.

Considering the Animate Dead spell can only be used to create Skeletons or Zombies, you need to be more specific on what you intend to say here. If you are agreeing that creating an undead is not always evil, then I agree.

You can use the spell to control undead that you have created. I would not regard this use as inherently evil.

A necromancer controlling Zombies and Skeletons from the MM does not need to use a bonus action to command them. The spell requires that you use a bonus action to command them.

I see. How does the MM state that they are commanded?

The MM zombies and skeletons can have multiple orders. For example, you could command one group of zombies to close the door while another group charges the adventurers. The spell disallows this, all undead under your control must follow the same command as a group.

No, it specifically doesn't.
It states that you can command any or all of them. So the first round you command one group of zombies to charge the adventurers, the second round you command another group to close the door.

The MM states that you must issue a command to the undead to prevent them from attacking the living. The spell says that without a command, they stand motionless and only act to defend themselves.

I would guess that the player resource assumes that PCs would command their minions not to attack living creatures - such as themselves - unless ordered to.

As an addendum to that point, the order to not attack the living would then be null when you give any other command, because as pointed out, the undead of the spell can only follow a single command at a time.

Where does it say that?

This is all in addition to the points I have told you before, such as the spell making no mention of dark magic, evil spirits, or the losing control leading to murder.

The "foul mimicry of life" implies certain things however.
The spell does not state anything about the behaviour of the skeleton once uncontrolled. That would make its behaviour down to the DM to decide. - Who may well decide to use the guidance in the MM.

And that is an assumption that we can show is not always true.

Heck, even taking a different spell. Animate Object does not get you an Animated Sword or a Rug of Smothering.

The animate object spell does not state that you use the statistics of the Animated Sword etc.
The MM states that they are crafted, so I would suggest creating them as magic items. Other differences between the spell and the creature entry such as behaviour when subjected to dispel magic would seem to support this.

The spell Create Homunculus actually added abilities to the Homunculus in the Monster Manual, allowing you to increase it's health which is something the original monster could not do.

I think that that is probably due to the ability for a player to create a homunculus coming out after the MM entry had been written. That or its something more important to the use of the spell than the creature itself. - Like the fact that the MM entry does not state that skeletons controlled under the animate dead spell can be commanded purely mentally.

 

[Maxperson]

Where does it say that?

It's implied in the spell. If you give a command, it follows that task until complete. No commands and they just sit there. That implies that they can only follow one command at a time, which makes sense. They aren't geniuses.