Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LoneWolf23" data-source="post: 1741543" data-attributes="member: 643">Mark me as another who believes that Necromancy's evil because it disturbs the just rest of the dead.  Patlin pretty much hit the nail on the head with his description of how Animating The Dead might work: it's not pretty, it's not just turning corpses into puppets, it's about binding the souls of the dead into dead flesh and bones to create minions.   ...And, of course, there's nothing garanteeing that the corpse belongs to the soul in question: after all, what's easier, reaching into the afterlife for someone's soul, or just snatching up any lost soul wandering about within reach and putting it to work?I'll also refer to Relics and Rituals: Excalibur when it comes to explaining the classic medieval outlook on death and necromancy.  Basicallt, in such settings, people are used to death and the sight of corpses, because death comes easily in an age before modern medecine (even with magical healing).  But this familiarity with death also breeds an attitude of respect for the dead: even peasents get a proper burial, and armies will call truces at night so each side can gather it's dead for funeral.  Saying unkind words about the dead is considered incredibly rude, and often a cause for violence if spoken within earshot of a relative of the dead.  This leads to the notion that using magic to call the dead or summon them to unlife is the greatest desecration of the sanctity of death possible. Now, of course, different cultures might have different outlooks.  Eberron's Elves of Aerenal use magic to allow them to preserve their most worthy elders beyond death as Deathless, while the same campaign world's nation of Karnath resurrects it's own dead soldiers to use replenish it's army.  But both of them have special circumstances which lead to those practices.</blockquote>

Verification