Why does Undead=Evil

[Zweischneid]

As I recall, there is even a branch of one such faith (Nepalese Buddhism?) in which the bodies of the deceased are left on the mountainside for vultures to pick clean.

Well, thats Tibetan Buddhism (Nepal is a Hindu country.. albeit with many tibetan refugees).

The bodies are left for vultures, because to bury them would mean to defile the earth itself and angre the spirits of the land who would then take possession of the body to ravage the land in anger (i.e. undead).

Historically, the practice of leaving bodies for the birds can be traced to the fact that burying bodies is impossible in Tibet (the ground is frozen 11 out of 12 months a year) and wood is a very rare thing, to precious to be wasted on the dead.

Leaving a body is actually a pretty clean way to dispose of it compared to moldy crypts or stone cairns that will likely lead to the spread of disease.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Thanks for the correction, Zweischneid!

While we're on it, though, I know that there are a lot of animist faiths out there that claim that all things have souls.

In the example you mentioned while correcting me, are those possessing spirits those of deceased humans, demons, or actual spirits of the land?

I ask because each would have different alignment consequences- I would naturally assume that possession of a dead body by demons would result in evil undead, while possession by nature spirits would result in TN undead. Humans: Who knows?

 

[Zweischneid]

Mr Gone, from what I learned in my comparative religion classes, many of the Eastern religions (Buddhism, Shinto, Hinduism and others) do not consider the body sacred. Rituals may be performed, but they are more to guide the spirit of the deceased than to venerate the body.

And they do that, because of the things that happen when the spirit is not guided properly are evil things indeed.

Infact both Hindu and Shinto consider it corrupting to even touch or handle a dead body often employing outcastes (or untouchables in Hindu countries) to handle the business of the dead.

Now try to imagine what they would think about a walking corpse.

(Infact both Hindu and Shinto lore have a rich reservoir of stories about vengeful dead, none of them very good and the sheer amount of rituals, prayers, dances and customs to keep dead spirits out of the house in both religions is staggering.)

 

[Zweischneid]

ask because each would have different alignment consequences- I would naturally assume that possession of a dead body by demons would result in evil undead, while possession by nature spirits would result in TN undead. Humans: Who knows?

Both versions exist... Tibetan Buddhism is a messy religion, mixed with old Bon Animism, Demon Worship, Hindu Customs and a score of other things.

I would argue they are nature spirits, but since their actions are very much violent and threating to the people when they possess a body, the also qualify as evil.

By default of the land they live in, nature tends to oppose the Tibetans on every turn and they do not have much love for their land.
The very mountains that surround them are mostly evil and vengeful deities that must be appeased with sacrifices.


Either way.. it wouldn't apply much to a reqular D&D game which is very muched based on european concepts of death and afterlife.

It might be worth reading into it for an Oriental campaign though.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I would argue they are nature spirits, but since their actions are very much violent and threating to the people when they possess a body, the also qualify as evil.

By default of the land they live in, nature tends to oppose the Tibetans on every turn and they do not have much love for their land.
The very mountains that surround them are mostly evil and vengeful deities that must be appeased with sacrifices.

Well, the first statement standing alone seems counterintuitive- they are, after all, reacting to a defilement! You might as well call anyone who fights back evil!

However, in the context that the Tibetans consider their local nature spirits evil (and who could blame them, really) that would make sense.

 

[Zweischneid]

Well, the first statement standing alone seems counterintuitive- they are, after all, reacting to a defilement! You might as well call anyone who fights back evil!

However, in the context that the Tibetans consider their local nature spirits evil (and who could blame them, really) that would make sense.

Well, I am only making assumptions on bits and pieces I've picked up.

Tibetan Religion takes a lifetime to understand and more than that to master.

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

Positive and negative energy are not aligned. So what is the problem with useing one or the other as a power source to make something move?

Hmm negative energy is inimical to all (natural) life, snuffing it out and causing the loss of lifespan, health and soul through contact with it. As far as abstract force/energy can be evil, this very well fits the descriptor for "evil" as in "very detriminal". Unless of course one considers the extinguishing of (all) life something worthwhile and "good"

Positive energy is the opposite, rejuvenating, healing and boosting the natural processes of life. Contact with it is not harmful per se. It has little if any detriminal side-effects.

The raw states that the spell is evil, but it does not say why. There is nothing in the srd that says anything about the soul, merely that you have to target a dead body. The material focus is a gem so going with the 'needing a spark from item XX to help focus the power' we can say that the gem itself is providing the evil necissary, or is working as a conduit for the energy needed (which is not evil), or any number of things. It just isnt said.

It employs negative energy, which is as close as you can come to a pure evil energy (without pulling out the BoVD), and it does so not simply for a momentary effect, but for an extended enslavement of other people's mortal shells, entirely at the caster's whim. Unless you consider enslavement or abuse of other people's property (their dead shells) an acceptable act.
The gem analogy doesn't fly, simply because it a focus, therefore it serves to concentrate and maintain the negative energy used to animate the corpse.

Why is it evil? who knows. Taboo shouldnt come into play on the good/evil axis, something being taboo does not necissarily make it evil. Many taboo's have come about because of safety concerns that have grown on the communities conscious. Effectively they are incredibly strong bonds of something that should not be done by being told not to do it, which would make them fall under the law/chaos spectrum. Of course in the real world it is very hard to see the difference between good/lawful and evil/chaotic, as there are many forces which try to say good = lawful = good and evil = chaotic = evil.

There are things that can be called evil - perhaps read up on some philosophy, I recommend Immanuel Kant and perhaps Nietzsche on theories of moral and ethical absolutes and rules. Very enlightening. in a nutshell Evil constitutes actions which cannot stand unchallenged, because their proliferation will destroy humanity and human interaction. Like unchecked murder. Like denial of basic rights. Live and interact and such a way as you yourself expect to be interacted with.
And - if someone chooses to not call something "evil" it does not in any way make it factually any less so, it still stays evil.

Also, disrespecting someone isnt Evil. It may not be Good, but that does not make it Evil. If someone does a bad job on, say, a craft and you tell them so this could be looked at as disrespect, especially if it was said by an understudy. This does not make the understudy evil.

An evil person can be disrespectful, but being disrespectful does not make you evil. (in a general sense of course).[/QUOTE]

Criticism is not disrespect, especially from someone who makes decisions depending on the work criticised, or who has paid for a work of a certain standard. That's a basic human right of free speech and freedom of opinion, but even there, rules of conduct and propriety apply. An unwarranted or unasked for criticism is something else. But whoever performs in the public eye (often to be appreciated ) also exposes himself to public scrutiny, and hence criticism, be it positive or negative. That is _not_disrespect.

While taking possession and control of someone's mortal shell, without their explicit permission to do so, for an infinite amount of time, and no restrictions on what to do with their remains... Now, that _is_ disrespectful. Because it violates any ideas of free will and whatever the deceased wished for his mortal shell, not even starting on the subject of enslavement. Lets not even start on the sanctity of one's own body and the basic (human - sounds corny in a fantasy context, so lets include all demi-humans, humanoids etc. ) right of self-determination regarding one's own mortal flesh and its (ab-)uses others. We are slowly slipping into the territory of RL-abuse here, so lets be careful were we tread, shall we ?

Animate Object etc. on the other hand uses objects that never (naturally) were the body/mortal shell of any conscious lifeform, and hence their "use" and animation does not violate anyone's rights. Besides not being of an infinite duration. And besides _not_ being inherently "non-objects" like corpses.
But yes, if you use "animate object" on a corpse, that would be a rather disrespectful act (against the will of its previous occupant, aka, the soul ) in and of it itself, on the borderline of evil. Of course, "animate dead" then adds enslavement, abuse (you didn't want it around for decoration and company, did you ?) and use of negative energy to that basic scenario, which makes it distinctly worse - due and the corrupting effects they may have on their wielder.

Without the evil tag the spell would pretty much be right along the same lines of animate objects. With it there is a much lesser scope of use. It probably should not have the evil tag however, not without there actually being something evil involved. There are good undead after all, even if they sometimes come with a different name.

As stated elsewhere, those "few and far between" good undead are universally hypercharged by positive energy, keeping them "alive" far beyond the constraints of their mortal bodies. They do not try to proliferate their undead state and destroy life like all (excluding animated skeletons and zombies here ) other undead do.
And if you do not regard the issues of abuse, enslavement and employing anti-life negative energy which are involved as morally abhorrent (and yes, as stated above, there are moral absolutes, independent of any religious doctrines. Just consider that they occured in any stable human society independent of religious affiliation or geographical proximity... ), than I suspect you either have a great deal of growing up ahead of you, or are going to get into serious conflict with civilized society sooner or later, sorry to say. In a way, I honestly hope you are taking your stance just to be provocative.....

Negative energy =! Evil

Hmm, lets have a short descritption of the Negative Energy Plane (MotP)

"Its the hunger that devours the soul."
"..its aneedy greedy plane that sucks the life out of anything that is vulnerable"
"it greedily sucks the energy out of anything it can"
"its a place inimical to all life..."

With other words - pure, uncontrolled entropy, the enemy of all life. Now, if it had a will or consciousness, that would be a distinctly "evil". And consider - even if a power is merely a power, now would the power supplied by a demon prince supplied to a worshipper be neutral and "un-aligned", even without disregard to its source and method of generation ?

Face it, within the constraints of the D20 game, even non-sentient objects and energies can be imbued with "hallow" or "unhallowed" aspects. And yes, that means that power can actually, literally corrupt. If that you don't accept that premise, make up a house-rule. But don't complain about the "unfairness" of the rules, or try to rationalize the ethically questionable aspects of necromancy.

 

[Kalanyr]

Ah neither Baator nor the Abyss nor Gehenna nor Hades are sentient but they are Evil, says so in their alignment description because everything that makes them up is Evil. The energy planes lack either Good or Evil descriptors, and since sentience is not a requirement ......

Oh and negative energy is definitely not a bad thing exclusively. Imagine the nightmare earth would become if nothing ever died. We'd be overcrowded and starving or eaten by some creature that should have long died off. Either positive or negative energy in extremes are bad for mortals to much Positive Energy makes mortals EXPLODE, that doesn't seem very good to me, and seems very inimical.

Its just that as a society we view decay as evil and rejuvenation as good despite the occasional acknowledgement that without both things wouldn't work out so well.

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

Ah neither Baator nor the Abyss nor Gehenna nor Hades are sentient but they are Evil, says so in their alignment description because everything that makes them up is Evil. The energy planes lack either Good or Evil descriptors, and since sentience is not a requirement ......

Oh and negative energy is definitely not a bad thing exclusively. Imagine the nightmare earth would become if nothing ever died. We'd be overcrowded and starving or eaten by some creature that should have long died off. Either positive or negative energy in extremes are bad for mortals to much Positive Energy makes mortals EXPLODE, that doesn't seem very good to me, and seems very inimical.

Its just that as a society we view decay as evil and rejuvenation as good despite the occasional acknowledgement that without both things wouldn't work out so well.

None of the Inner planes can have alignments as they represent energies . While the Outer planes such as Baathor, Carceri etc are the created and manifested homeplanes of aligned beings of immense power, incarnations of raw power, mirroring their creators and rulers attitude and alignment. Hence they are evil (or good, lawful or chaotic depending upon their place in the sheme of things ).

As for positive energy making people explode...Lol, of course anything can become dangerous with overdosing, but where is the logical connection to positive energy being not benficial in general ?
While negative energy is universally dangerous and harmful even in small doses (to the lifeforms of the D20 universe that is - we can of course argue a hypothetical universe where everything is turned around, but what is the point ?), high doses and exposure to it commonly change you into a creature that is driven only by the nature of its negative energy charge, draining more and more "life" and proliferating, causing an ever increasing drain of the world if unchecked. Positive energy (or any of the other elemental energies at that ) doesn't. Negative energy is by its consuming, unchecked nature an unabashedly selfish force. It gives nothing, it takes everything. So what is there to it that is not malevolent ?

Negative energy is perhaps a necessary force, but only because it cannot be done without to balance the universe - game mechanics wise. But its not the natural cycle of things, but the focused, distilled force of entropy, which has no place in the normal course oftime passing. And decay, autumn and winter are part of a cycle of constant rejuvenation and _change_ not irretrievable consumption, and not destruction for its own ends. What decays gives life in the next cycle. Nothing indicates that negative energy gives anything back that it takes.


As for our society and its (lamentably hyped ) points of view - premature decay and destruction, outside the natural cycle of change and rebirth is definitely not "good", desirable or usually beneficial, regardless of how spoiled contemporary society might view and alledgedly worship youth and wellness. Ask anyone who has actually grown old and has to deal with the shortcomings of a frailer body, and while they cherish their lifes' experience and wealth of memories, they wouldn't mind doing without the fraility.
BTW, I was not talking rejuvenation in the sense of eternal life in the first place, but accelerated healing and mending of un-natural damages, vigour and stamina beyond mortal limits. mea culpa if I used a confusing terminology.
And there is no life-prolonging or extending magics in (core) D&D anymore these days that is not based on negative energy, so no foundation for your claim that positive energy does actually prolong life to be found there, disturbing the natural cycle. But, actually, that might make a nice seed for a non-standard campaign....

 

[green slime]

Mr Gone, from what I learned in my comparative religion classes, many of the Eastern religions (Buddhism, Shinto, Hinduism and others) do not consider the body sacred. Rituals may be performed, but they are more to guide the spirit of the deceased than to venerate the body.

So none of these cultures would particularly object if I "desecrated" their grave sites, collected the bones of their ancestors and ground them into paste I sell as fertilizer, and create jockstraps from their skin and skulls? Or use "Uncle Bob's left foot" as an ashtray. Somehow, I think not.

As I recall, there is even a branch of one such faith (Nepalese Buddhism?) in which the bodies of the deceased are left on the mountainside for vultures to pick clean.

Zoastrians in Iran practice this, I believe. IIRC, it comes originally from some ancient form of Sun worship. But just because this is a correct way to dispose of a body for them, and to some of us may seem disrepectful, does not mean that as a Zoastrian you can dispose of a corpse in any old fashion you may desire. No indeed.