D&D 5E Why is animate dead considered inherently evil?

[Tolerable Tyrant]

I'm having a troublesome time understanding why the animate dead spell is considered evil. When I read the manual it states that the spall imbues the targeted corpse with a foul mimicry of life, implying that the soul is not a sentient being who is trapped in a decaying corpse. Rather, the spell does exactly what its title suggests, it only animates the corps. Now of course one could use the spell to create zombies that would hunt and kill humans, but by that same coin, they could create a labor force that needs no form of sustenance (other than for the spell to be recast of course). There have also been those who have said "the spell is associated with the negative realm which is evil", however when you ask someone why the negative realm is bad that will say "because it is used for necromancy", I'm sure you can see the fallacy in this argument.

However, I must take into account that I have only looked into the DnD magic system since yesterday so there are likely large gaps in my knowledge. PS(Apon further reflection I've decided that the animate dead spell doesn't fall into the school of necromancy, as life is not truly given to the corps, instead I believe this would most likely fall into the school of transmutation.) PPS(I apologize for my sloppy writing, I've decided I'm feeling too lazy to correct it.)

 

[payn]

I feel like the better question is 'why has D&D bent so far over backwards to make undead evil?'.

We've gone from bone robots to skeletons animated by some sort of depraved, life-hating energy with all sorts of 'dark' buzzwords attached to make darn sure it's clear that this specific monster type is Very Naughty. It reminds me of the Ecology of the Drow article that tries to make them extra evil by saying drow kill their twins in the womb. Maximum Edge.

I know you like to take silly extreme cases to make other things sound stupid, but folks have made historical cases for undead being evil. It's a long held cultural belief that goes well beyond a D&D thing. It's a flavor choice that builds in conflict and makes undead an interesting element of the game.

It's also not necessary, but what makes undead interesting then?

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

Oh, like folks could sabotage your workforce and send it at you interesting? The firearm comparison is that firearms are interesting because they are used in conflict, not because you can shoot clay pigeons or scavenge for food with them.

Yes, the appeal of firearms in games is for violent purposes because people find artificial worlds with no consequence fun. I don't believe many players of DnD play so that they can establish a flourishing economy.

 

[Maxperson]

If we’re talking about 5e here, it isn’t “inherently evil.” Some characters would probably consider it evil for any number of reasons, but there are no actual game rules connecting any particular spell to any particular alignment.

5e does say this, though.

"Creating the undead through the use of necromancy spells such as animate dead is not a good act, and only evil casters
use such spells frequently."

 

[payn]

Yes, the appeal of firearms in games is for violent purposes because people find artificial worlds with no consequence fun. I don't believe many players of DnD play so that they can establish a flourishing economy.

Isnt that what you are trying to achieve though? A world that uses undead as an efficient workforce?

 

[Greg Benage]

5e does say this, though.

"Creating the undead through the use of necromancy spells such as animate dead is not a good act, and only evil casters
use such spells frequently."

That seems to be substantively different from "These spells are inherently evil."

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

Isnt that what you are trying to achieve though? A world that uses undead as an efficient workforce?

That is worldbuilding. Not something players do.

 

[payn]

That is worldbuilding. Not something players do.

Oh, its reducing undead to scenery? I guess its a hard concept for me to come around to because fighting evil undead or creating evil undead is part of the things players do in D&D games.

 

[Maxperson]

That seems to be substantively different from "These spells are inherently evil."

Kinda. If there were nothing in the spells that's inherently evil, no amount of castings would make the caster evil. Only evil casters use the spells frequently indicates that there's at least some small stain of evil involved in the casting of such spells.

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

Oh, its reducing undead to scenery? I guess its a hard concept for me to come around to because fighting evil undead or creating evil undead is part of the things players do in D&D games.

I'm using established lore and spell rules to accurately depict a nonevil society revolving around the animate dead spell.

 

[Tolerable Tyrant]

That seems to be substantively different from "These spells are inherently evil."

Yes, what you say is true. Would you mind mentally rephrasing it as "Is the animate dead spell inherently evil?"