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.)

 

[Lanefan]

My biggest question about all of this: Druids are all about nature, balance, etc... However, when we see a thematic element in a class, we also often see versions appear in antithesis to the core concept. Anti-paladins or Oath Breakers, for example. Where are the dark druids that animate dead and oppose the natural order? Where are the anti-druids?

Right there, as evil-aligned Druids. But they don't oppose the natural order (if they did, why and how would they be Druids in the first place?), instead they seek to (ab)use it to further their own nefarious ends.

The class you outline later in this post is good, but would to me make far more sense as a subclass of something arcane - Wizard, Sorcerer, whatever - than of a divine class.

 

[jgsugden]

....My biggest question about all of this: Druids are all about nature, balance, etc... However, when we see a thematic element in a class, we also often see versions appear in antithesis to the core concept. Anti-paladins or Oath Breakers, for example. Where are the dark druids that animate dead and oppose the natural order? Where are the anti-druids?...

Right there, as evil-aligned Druids. But they don't oppose the natural order (if they did, why and how would they be Druids in the first place?), instead they seek to (ab)use it to further their own nefarious ends.

The class you outline later in this post is good, but would to me make far more sense as a subclass of something arcane - Wizard, Sorcerer, whatever - than of a divine class.

We can easily do Undead focused Clerics, Paladins, Sorcerers, Warlocks and Wizards. It just seems odd that Druids don't really get to do so. heck, it is easier to build a Bard Necromancer than a Druid one.

The absence strikes me more due to my setting. I just thought it would be something others noted as well.

In my world, the Divine, Arcane and Nature classes receive their magic through the Weave. This is a conduit that connects all things and runs from the core of the Positive Energy Plane to the core of the Negative Energy Plane. Arcane spellcasters take from the Weave, Divine spellcasters are delivered gifts through the Weave, but Nature Spellcasters - Druids and Rangers, primarily - accept the gifts of the Weave and let it flow through them. As this flow is connected to both the source of all life force and the place all life foreces eventually end up (true death), my Nature casters tend to have a greater affinity for death magics than other druids and rangers - and I've inserted homebrew spells to support it. Thus, I do not see as a druid that uses natural forces to kill and destroy to be an Anti-Druid ... that is just a druid. In my setting they have a role supporting balance ... and when good is in control, that may mean taking down good.

The Anti-natural life Druid as the Anti-Druid is different. It isn't destruction - it is about turning your back on the Weave itself. As the Weave is the conduit for life forces from beginning to end, the primary natural antithesis is undeath. I get that in some settings you might see a druid that burns the forest to kill a foe as an anti-druid, or as others have stated you might see an artificer and their devotion to technology over the natural order to be an anti-druid ... but in my setting, burning a forest is part of the natural order and technology is harnessing natural forces. It is the Anti-Life of the Undead that is a direct opposition to the Druidic ways.

I could write how all of this is tied up in the Far Realms, Aberrations, Demons, Shadowfell, and various Powers (like Orcus) ... but ...

 

[Alzrius]

Artificers are the anti-druid.

Nature versus industrialization, natural versus the artificial.

3E had an urban druid (from Dragon #317, later reprinted in the Dragon Compendium). Unearthed Arcana also gave us an urban ranger.

 

[Voadam]

3E had an urban druid (from Dragon #317, later reprinted in the Dragon Compendium). Unearthed Arcana also gave us an urban ranger.

I didn't see that specific implementation for a druid, was it treating the city as a different natural terrain with its own nature aspects the way I believe Shadowrun did and the way I thought of the urban ranger or was it a druidism that rejected nature for industrialization?

Druids turning into rats and pigeons and squirrels and communing with the spirit of a city instead of the spirit of a forest seems very in tune with core druidism.

 

[Alzrius]

I didn't see that specific implementation for a druid, was it treating the city as a different natural terrain with its own nature aspects the way I believe Shadowrun did and the way I thought of the urban ranger or was it a druidism that rejected nature for industrialization?

Druids turning into rats and pigeons and squirrels and communing with the spirit of a city instead of the spirit of a forest seems very in tune with core druidism.

To quote from the class description:

Religion: An urban druid worships the purity of society and the city above all else. Religions are incorporated into this as a whole, although the urban druid finds more to draw power from the from the massive cathedrals and huge masses of worshipers than from their deities.

Other Classes: Urban druids share a love of society with the bard and the rogue, and they tend to find the company of these classes the most pleasing. Their devotion to cities and civilization often place them at odds with more rural regions and the woodlands beyond; as a result, they tend to avoid interacting with rangers and druids. Barbarians, with their rash behavior and disdain for civilized life, are the most reviled of the other classes.

 

[Voadam]

To quote from the class description:

That is a bit odd. I guess worshipping society instead of nature, so druids as non-god worshippers is the concept and connection?

 

[Alzrius]

That is a bit odd. I guess worshipping society instead of nature, so druids as non-god worshippers is the concept and connection?

That's roughly it in a nutshell.

 

[Tonguez]

My biggest question about all of this: Druids are all about nature, balance, etc... However, when we see a thematic element in a class, we also often see versions appear in antithesis to the core concept. Anti-paladins or Oath Breakers, for example. Where are the dark druids that animate dead and oppose the natural order? Where are the anti-druids?.

I prefer Blighters to be about contagious disease and decay rather than undead, but mindless infected work for the disease angle too so things like Yellow Musk Creeper Zombies or the Cordyceps zombies (Last of Us) might be nurtured by druids as a part of the natural life cycle of those plants.

 

[Umbran]

The Anti-natural life Druid as the Anti-Druid is different. It isn't destruction - it is about turning your back on the Weave itself.

So, that's the key there.

To make an evil cleric, the cleric is still drawing power from belief/devotion, they just have a different focus of that belief. To make an anti-paladin, again, devotion is key, the only question is devotion to what?

The other classes get an antithesis through change of mindset, not change in the general metaphysical source of their power.

In the generic form, druids draw from the power of life itself, sometimes by way of a deity of nature. Following the above pattern, then the anti-druid should still be using the power of life itself, just applied through a different mindset. If the power of life itself cannot make standard undead, well, then the anti-druid can't.

You've chosen to break from that pattern. There's nothing wrong with that, per se, but since it is a deviation from the game design, your approach doesn't fall out of it quite as easily.

 

[jgsugden]

So, that's the key there.

To make an evil cleric, the cleric is still drawing power from belief/devotion, they just have a different focus of that belief. To make an anti-paladin, again, devotion is key, the only question is devotion to what?

However, fans of Critical Role might think of someone that gives themself wholly to Predathos, without a deal but out of a desire to see Predathos do what Predathos does, and is granted power not via a deal but to further the charge of Predathos, might be an anti-cleric.

...You've chosen to break from that pattern. There's nothing wrong with that, per se, but since it is a deviation from the game design, your approach doesn't fall out of it quite as easily.

All of that is true, but it is a sidestep away from my point.

The druid is all about the natural balance. The original AD&D PHB druid was shades closer to the Celtic origins than the current version - but contained no reference to an opposition to undead. The same is true of 2nd edition. However, those of us that played in that era often interpreted that druids should oppose undead heavily as it was against the natural order. For many, the druid stance against undead is obvious, prominent, and significant - not because someone told us, but because it just makes so much sense.

And as this is an RPG, and RPGs work best with good storytelling, and good storytelling often relies upon conflict ... it feels like a gap to not have that oppositional anti-druid that turned their back on the ideals of the druids for some reason and aligns with the exact oppositie.

Yes, I can do this role with an evil cleric, an evil paladin, an evil sorcerer, an evil warlock, an evil necromancer wizard, etc... but it seems like a gap in the design that we don't have this obvious opposition in the core RPG after all of these years. It even plays into some believed Celtic Druid beliefs - beliving that the soul passed from body to body at death rather than passing on to another place. Where do those druidic beliefs and liches overlap on a ven diagram? That depends upon your interporetation of liches ... or shadows ... or wwaiths and wights ...