Why does Undead=Evil

[Raven Crowking]

Removed by author.

 

[Scion]

Undead are generally powered by the negative material plane, sure. But then some are powered by the positive material plane (more in 2nd edition than I have seen in 3rd, but still).

Holy water is again with the cleric which is again with the undead creation (which clerics are the best at over all casters). Holy water has the 'good' descriptor because good clerics make it and it hurts undead who are powered by the negative material plane.

Someone can be killed by a million negative energy levels and yet still go to the afterlife. No mention of it destroying the soul.

SRD:
Energy Drain (Su): This attack saps a living opponent’s vital energy

This really isnt that much different than any other damaging attack. Certainly no different than poison (which work under incredibly similar circumstances).

While the book of exalted deeds (and possibly book of vile darkness as well) define poison as evil those references are simply wrong. It is generally unlawful (hence why the paladin cannot use it), but it is no more evil than hitting someone with a burning torch or with your sword. Merely another way of dealing damage.

P.S.: Yes, I know that mindless undead are not evil themselves. Evil has, however, been done to the soul imprint left in the body.

Actually, mindless undead 'are' listed as evil. Which is a further contradiction. something within a mind, and therefore cannot have intent or thought processes (even less than animals, which are neutral), has an alignment other than neutral.

Also, I still see no reason for evil to have been done to the 'soul imprint'. I read those arguements earlier but they seemed to be a lot of guesswork. Why does it have to be a soul imprint? why cant it just be knowledge retained in the brain? Not necissarily having any connection at all with the soul.

Anyway though, my comments about negative energy benig the same as fire stem from the fact that how one is described can generally fit the other. Both destroy. Both cause pain. Both can be used for evil.

So, if someone says, 'but it kills! it must be evil!' then I'll say, 'then you believe fire is evil'. But thinking that fire is evil I believe most people would see as nonsensical, hence why it needs to be said.

Good clerics tend to use positive energy. Evil clerics tend to use negative energy. This does not make either of those good or evil anymore than monks usually useing their unnarmed strikes makes those attacks generally lawful (eventually they get lawful ki strike of course, but that is neither here nor there, useing ones fists is not inherantly 'lawful' because a lawful class uses them often)

 

[ecliptic]

I haven't really read the replies.

Here is my answer.

Since you use negative energy to power undead, you are bringing that negative energy to the Material Plane. The more negative energy on the Material Plane, the more suffering, sadness, etc there is.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

Well, you know the undead always intrude on conversations and derail them and make political comments about how only stupid and evil people vote for the other party.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed.

 

[Scion]

Scion, how do you define evil?

Unimportant. It is too big of a discussion for this thread. Merely stating that a tool is not inherantly evil, no matter how that tool normally operates, should be enough.

Animals can do no evil, no matter what they do really. A baseball bat can do no evil, although whoever weilds it might be able to. As such, a skeleton in and of itself, which is merely powered by some form of energy (much like steam powers some kinds of trains), is not evil. The game says that it is and gives no explanation as to why. That is good enough, unless someone asks 'why'. The answer to that? Just because the game says so. This is not really a sufficient answer to the 'why' question. It can be used, but it is completely unsatisfactory.

Why would useing negative energy be considered evil? We could ask the same question for every energy type.

So, it is unimportant what I consider to be evil because a nonaligned energies are, by definition, not aligned.

Saying that undead are evil because they use negative energy is just like saying a forest fire is evil because it uses fire.

Basically, for the d&d system skeletons are evil because the gods say so. But, for the question of 'why' that answer does nothing.

 

[Tuzenbach]

Skeletons and Zombies are evil. Creating an evil being is evil.

Uh oh. Where's Neitchze when we need him?

Why do skeletons and zombies always have to be assumed as "evil"? Because it says so in the MM?

How can the creation of anything be deemed as "evil"? Isn't it destruction that's evil, not creation?

 

[Tuzenbach]

There is of course a difference between 'not good' and 'Evil'.

Also, there is a difference between 'unlawful' and 'Evil'.


I have no problem with animating the dead not being evil. So long as it does nothing to the soul then there is no problem. Negative energy is not evil either and one could also power undead by positive energy if push came to shove.

By the core animate dead is an evil spell, and many undead are classified as evil. Although it doesnt really give any reason why. Especially since a good number of undead are nonintelligent, pretty hard to have an alignment if you have no intelligence. Animals are classified as neutral because they have no ability to distinguish right from wrong, are nonintelligent undead any different?

Houserule wise I have changed animate dead in former campaigns to be nonevil, merely a neutral act. Some forms are evil (those that do something with the soul) but merely useing someones body is not good or evil, but it can be lawful or unlawful. There are societies in various books and video games that are not evil and yet they use animated dead (with permission) to better society. No one really wants to muck the stables, but the animated dead will do it all day. There are lots of drudgery jobs that when the undead are doing it can free up people for more fullfilling tasks.

Effectively it can be treated the same as animating an object, what is the difference? One was built by process X and the other was built through process Y. So long as the soul is not disturbed then it is not evil, so long as it follows the laws of the lands then it is not unlawful.

Completely agree with this position, 100%.

 

[Tuzenbach]

It's very simple why creating undead is an evil act, and it has nothing to do with defiling a corpse. When you animate undead, you are binding that person's soul back into his flesh to serve as the animatory force - you are stealing their soul from the afterlife (good or bad) and trapping in their corpse.

Not only that, but as far as most things are concerned (outside of a grand total of 2 spells that can counteract it), if the undead is then destroyed that person's soul is destroyed as well. No second chance at the afterlife. Just shredded beyond all recognition, no longer a cohesive soul, gone, destroyed.

Raising undead is an evil act because it demonstrates a profound selfishness such that you are willing to destroy someone's eternal soul just to make your life easier by animating a servant.


That clear enough?

No, not clear enough in the least!

For starters, who says that animating undead brings that person's soul back and binds it to it's former body? If this is the case, where's the person's former intelligence and abilities? What you're speaking of sounds a lot more like Resurrection, which is supposed to be "good" in theory and practice.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed by author.