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

[Maxperson]

So it's about-how- the poison is used.

I guess using fireball to ignite a person's house while they sleep is similar?

I would consider that to be an evil act. It's murder.

 

[Maxperson]

Just about it. Fireballing a house while the people are sleeping and waiting for them to die of burning is not a good thing to do.
Pitching a fireball into enemies is akin to throwing a grenade into your enemies.

Pitching poison gas into your enemies is also akin to tossing a grenade. Poison is just another way to kill your enemy.

 

[Helldritch]

Pitching poison gas into your enemies is also akin to tossing a grenade. Poison is just another way to kill your enemy.

Yep. No complain on that. I am with you 100% on that one. The Geneva convention is not so keen on that however. But who am I to judge?

How about slowly poisoning your wife over months all the while proclaiming your love for her with kisses and tenderness? Here my love, take your arsenic seasoned tea. It will help you, believe me. It is, in my eyes and those of almost everyone, the most evil way to kill someone. Only poison can do that. It is fortunate that in D&D we don't see the long therm effects of poison. Because in real life, being the victim of slow acting poison, even if you survive, can cripple you with pain and disability for life.

This is this aspect that 1ed saw and implemented. From nerve and brain damage to lung, liver and kidney failures/disability this is what poison is doing. In our game, 5ed poison is an instantaneous thing that you can recover. It makes it much more "acceptable" to people who do not know how devastating/crippling (and permanently so) poisons can be. In my work, we work with a lot of chemical and poisonous material. The safety equipment is pretty much necessary and I personally saw what a simple breath of a poisonous reaction did to the father of a coworker at our powerplant. He did not die, but no more jogging for him. He needs a respirator mask at all times just to breathe. But yeah... poison is not evil...

 

[PrandletheBold]

In 1e you're quite right, Skeletons and Zombies are neutral; largely because they simply don't have enough brain power to gain an alignment. That said, in 1e higher level casters can get things going that are signficiantly higher on the food chain than Zombies - I'm not sure if it was 3e or 4e that started the idea of limiting it to Zombies at most.

Where is this written up? According to the 1e PH write-up re Animate Dead "This spell creates the lowest of the undead monsters, skeletons or zombies, from the bones or bodies of dead humans." I couldn't find anything in the DMG adding in additional undead types.

In my game (modified 1e) I still have Animate Dead flagged as an Evil spell, however, because a) the creation of undead is an Evil act overall (just like poison use) and b) because higher-level casters can get things like Ghouls, Wights, and other delights going with the spell and all of those are Evil as ****.

In our game, skeletons and zombies are the limit.

... anytime I've ever met it the animation of a corpse means that spirit can thenceforth never be revived to normal life, and in some cases it also means the spirit is still somewhat tied to the undead corpse if it's brought up as a Wight or a Wraith or similar.

Welcome to a new idea then. In our game, there is NO connection between the undead zombie or skeleton and the spirit. The spirit has already departed, leaving behind "the empty husk".

And yes, you can Raise or Resurrect someone again if that person has been turned into an undead (IF there is enough body left for either). In fact, animating their corpses a useful way to bring your dead comrades' bodies back to town to Raise them rather than carrying or dragging them.

And there's the whole desecration-of-a-corpse thing, which admittedly matters far more in some cultures than in others.

Indeed. Some religions would have major problems with that. Others would see the body as being nothing other than compost left behind when the "true person" went on to a better place. Culture-dependent, most definitely.

Yes due to 1 and 2 above, along with the question of what the undead do after their creator loses control of them (which is almost inevitable at some point unless the creator is also either immortal or undead).

Inevitable unless the caster dispels them at some point and they return to being immobile corpses or piles of bones, if they cease action when no longer commanded, or if they fall over immobile when their animator drops dead. Just talking about my own game here -- I know that everyone has their own unique rulings.

But you haven't yet answered my original question: Given the elements I listed (animated undead being Neutral, spirits are unaffected, and undead aren't being used for a nasty purpose ... and let's throw in that the hypothetical caster is making certain that if he or she drops dead from a coronary that their undead aren't going to go out roaming the countryside) ... is creating them still an Evil act?

 

[Chaosmancer]

The person attacking you with a spell, you see (usually).
The person attacking you with a weapon, you see (unless a sneak attack and you don't survive).
The person putting a fast acting poison and attacks you with a weapon you see (unless a sneak attack and you don't survive). (even I see nothing wrong in there, well... I do but I can understand. At least it does not inflict undue pain for any extended period of time.)

But here is the evil part of poison that has been there in fantasy, history and is still happening nowadays.
The person poisoning your food will look you in the eye. Smile and will continue to poison you until you die a slow painfull death all the while making you think that he/she is taking care of you. You think that this person is helping you. You think that this person loves you. You think that this person is a trusted friend/lover/family member. It is quite evil to do something like that. Claiming anything else is self delusion. But for the sake of simplicity, do as you want. If you find that this kind of action is fine and a good thing to do. So be it. This, is your game after all.

Or one of the slaves you keep and beat slips a poison into your wine, you die in seconds.

Poison is a tool. Calling it evil because the person using it is evil, would be the same as calling a scalpel evil because it used to torture a child to force their mother to answer your questions.

As for Chaosmancer.
Again, you put intentions in my words that are not there. A spell can be done for either good or evil. Almost every spells are considered tools. A tool is neither good or evil. Unfortunately for you, the only spells that are purely evil are animate dead and create undead. And this is only because they bring into existence evil undead. Now I told you again and again and again. All other spells are just a matter of perceptions and intentions. Where you see evil (by twisting the example so that you are right), I see good. You are the one perverting the intent of spells for a good use into an evil thing. And yet, you are advocating that creating evil creature is good??????? There is no logic in your arguments. Where you see logic in your arguments, I see sophism.

Then defend your position. Explain to me how destroying someones mind because it is cheaper and easier to imprison them that way than it is to build a proper prison to hold them is good.

My position begins with questioning whether the undead created are de facto evil. I have presented evidence that puts that into question. From that flows the rest of the argument. If the undead are neutral, then the spell is neutral, it becomes just a tool to be used for good or evil.

Yet, I look at the spell Feeblemind which does nothing except utterly destroy a person's mind, and I have to question how I could use this for good. Is it ever good to erase someone? To turn them into a mindless creature?

I notice you also refused to take up the defense of "well it can be healed" that I challenged.

I look at Geas. Slavery is generally an evil institution, is a spell which is essentially magical slavery ever going to be good?

And if these spells are so close to the line of evil, then why were they not called out? Why is only this one spell called out? Because it is somehow more evil to cast the spell frequently to summon a skeleton in a basement to clean your lab, then disassemble it or lock it away than it is to literally destroy the mind of a person and snuff out everything that makes them a person?

Yep. No complain on that. I am with you 100% on that one. The Geneva convention is not so keen on that however. But who am I to judge?

How about slowly poisoning your wife over months all the while proclaiming your love for her with kisses and tenderness? Here my love, take your arsenic seasoned tea. It will help you, believe me. It is, in my eyes and those of almost everyone, the most evil way to kill someone. Only poison can do that. It is fortunate that in D&D we don't see the long therm effects of poison. Because in real life, being the victim of slow acting poison, even if you survive, can cripple you with pain and disability for life.

This is this aspect that 1ed saw and implemented. From nerve and brain damage to lung, liver and kidney failures/disability this is what poison is doing. In our game, 5ed poison is an instantaneous thing that you can recover. It makes it much more "acceptable" to people who do not know how devastating/crippling (and permanently so) poisons can be. In my work, we work with a lot of chemical and poisonous material. The safety equipment is pretty much necessary and I personally saw what a simple breath of a poisonous reaction did to the father of a coworker at our powerplant. He did not die, but no more jogging for him. He needs a respirator mask at all times just to breathe. But yeah... poison is not evil...

You could slowly kill anyone with various chemicals. As was pointed out, burn victims suffer permanent debilitating damage to their bodies too. I've seen people who have suffered massive burn damage. It is equally horrible.

Acid could have similar damaging effects to people. In fact, I would imagine many acids to act like poisons if diluted enough.

And betrayal has nothing to do with the tool you use to slowly ruin the life of the person you are betraying.

Heck, taking a baseball bat to someone's knees could leave them crippled for life. Shall we call wood evil because someone uses it for evil? You have personal experience that makes this particular tool horrible for you to consider. I can respect that, but it is materially no different than dozens of other tools that can be used for evil. And poisons have good usages. Like medicine. Since almost every medicine is a poison in improper dosages.

 

[Maxperson]

Where is this written up? According to the 1e PH write-up re Animate Dead "This spell creates the lowest of the undead monsters, skeletons or zombies, from the bones or bodies of dead humans." I couldn't find anything in the DMG adding in additional undead types.

In our game, skeletons and zombies are the limit.

I think he's just saying that at higher levels a necromantic wizard can create other types of undead, not that Animate Dead does it.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You're arguing semantics, which is pretty much a waste of time. I've been saying that they are equivalent, not that it's exactly a homebrew.

You have called them homebrew. Repeatedly within this thread. That is not calling them equivalent, that is calling them by the same name.

You just said, "Good and evil are just sides in the cosmic conflict(has meaning) and otherwise meaningless." And that's not my position. That's the position of TSR, WotC and D&D. I'm just pointing it out.

You are the one arguing to defend their side, but if we are at this point where the definition of good and evil does not matter beyond which banner you march under, then being called evil is essentially meaningless.

 

[Maxperson]

You have called them homebrew. Repeatedly within this thread. That is not calling them equivalent, that is calling them by the same name.

I've said at least 15 times(no exaggeration) that they are equivalent, even going to the extent to call official settings Wizardsbrew. I don't understand how you can accidentally get things so terribly wrong all the time. Are you misstating our positions deliberately?

You are the one arguing to defend their side, but

Since you failed to understand what functional meant, I can understand your confusion here. Pointing out the facts of the game is not "defending" anything.

if we are at this point where the definition of good and evil does not matter beyond which banner you march under, then being called evil is essentially meaningless.

This is flat out wrong. You don't care about the meaning apparently, but meaning is very present. Not to mention, good is still good and evil is still evil, so there is far more than just "sides." The only thing you lack is relative good and evil, but you can easily make that homebrew if you wish.

 

[Helldritch]

My position begins with questioning whether the undead created are de facto evil. I have presented evidence that puts that into question. From that flows the rest of the argument. If the undead are neutral, then the spell is neutral, it becomes just a tool to be used for good or evil.

Skeletons and zombies are evil. Period. No evidence you brought from the rules say the contrary. In fact, you brought zero evidence to prove me or the book wrong.

Yet, I look at the spell Feeblemind which does nothing except utterly destroy a person's mind, and I have to question how I could use this for good. Is it ever good to erase someone? To turn them into a mindless creature?

I notice you also refused to take up the defense of "well it can be healed" that I challenged.

There was no challenge. It can be healed, fully, at almost no cost by not so high level casters. A 7th level spell is nothing to sniff at. A fifth level is usually easily accessible. Unless spell casters of 13+ level are common in world the fifth level spell is way more accessible. A magic nullifying spell cell costs a lot and can be escaped by conventional means. Not the feebleminded condition. It will take a divine caster to reverse the effect.

But is it ever good to earase a person's mind? Not IRL. Ever. But if it could be reversed as easily as in D&D... There was an episode about in B5 (it was in the 3rd or 4th season with Brad Douriff as the guest star. He played a serial killer that was sentenced to: Death of personality.) A very enlightening episode. You should watch it.

I look at Geas. Slavery is generally an evil institution, is a spell which is essentially magical slavery ever going to be good?

Slavery is evil. Geas is more like the GPS used to locate a prisoner to ensure of his location. Geas is better in that you ensure that he will respect the intention of the geas. It would not be used lightly. Only in cases where it is possible for the person to evade a zone of truth or similar magic (which can be done relatively easily). Again, a tool that can be used for evil or for good. You see evil, I see security. After all, nothing happens if you follow your conditions. Conditions can be good or evil, again you choose how you use them and act according to your alignment. Again, dear Chaosmancer, you choose to look only at evil geas. Not those that are made for the greater good. You see only what you want to see.

And if these spells are so close to the line of evil, then why were they not called out? Why is only this one spell called out? Because it is somehow more evil to cast the spell frequently to summon a skeleton in a basement to clean your lab, then disassemble it or lock it away than it is to literally destroy the mind of a person and snuff out everything that makes them a person?

Again, evil is evil. I have nothing more to say. These spells create evil monster. You bring the skeleton to clean your basement. You die of a heart attack in the meanwhile. After the cleaning the skeletons has no instruction. After 24h, control isn't restored and your young 10 year old children comes to the basement to see what is taking you so long and the skeleton happily kills the 10 year old child. Climb the stairs, kills your wife, your daughter and go outside and start killing whomever happens to be in the street until a guard or an adventurer comes to destroy the skeleton. A very good action indeed.

You could slowly kill anyone with various chemicals. As was pointed out, burn victims suffer permanent debilitating damage to their bodies too. I've seen people who have suffered massive burn damage. It is equally horrible.

Agreed on that. Again, a tool used for evil in an evil way. Burning is very crippling. I saved a friend from chemical and high temperature burns at our power plant. He has scars that will last for life but fortunately, they're not that bad as I knew what to do (I'm fully trained in First Aid). Surviving these can be very stressful and the permanent damage can be very debilitating. On that I fully agree.

And betrayal has nothing to do with the tool you use to slowly ruin the life of the person you are betraying.

This is where I disagree. Poison is the only tool that can be used without the knowledge of the victim. Acid, fire, baseball bat, magic, arrows just about everything else is face value. You can see it coming. Poison will not be noticed. This is the tool of the evil minded persons. On that, I agree fully with the games' authors/creators.

Heck, taking a baseball bat to someone's knees could leave them crippled for life. Shall we call wood evil because someone uses it for evil? You have personal experience that makes this particular tool horrible for you to consider. I can respect that, but it is materially no different than dozens of other tools that can be used for evil.

Of course you can get crippled. But at least, you can always defend yourself or another person's life with these. Poison, you can do nothing because you simply do not know. It is insidious, unseen and very efficient. But if for you the end justifies the means...

And poisons have good usages. Like medicine. Since almost every medicine is a poison in improper dosages.

In that context, they are not poisons any longer but a medicine. And you have to be very careful with the dosage. Even aspirin can kill you if you are not careful enough. Hell Viagra can be deadly, especially with Nitro. Never mix the two together.

 

[Eric V]

"Poison is the only tool that can be used without the knowledge of the victim. Acid, fire, baseball bat, magic, arrows just about everything else is face value. You can see it coming. Poison will not be noticed. This is the tool of the evil minded persons. On that, I agree fully with the games' authors/creators. "

Sooooo, everyone planning an ambush...?