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.)

 

[James Gasik]

Evil kittens though...so cute!

And yes, in 1e, without UA giving Fighters the option for Weapon Specialization (and DOUBLE Specialization), the Paladin does edge ahead noticeably more than in 2e. I specifically didn't mention the Holy Sword because I've played many Paladins and never got one. And for good reason, 50% magic resistance against evil spellcasters as an aura and a constant Dispel Magic? That thing is a nightmare (knightmare?)!

 

[Seramus]

I once had a DM (2E) who would make you lose a level if you shifted alignment. Yes, ALL classes.

Because (in his words) it was an important mechanic and there needed to be consequences for our actions.

At first I though it was just a kludge to keep us heroic, but no. It happened even if you moved sideways.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I once had a DM (2E) who would make you lose a level if you shifted alignment. Yes, ALL classes.

Because (in his words) it was an important mechanic and there needed to be consequences for our actions.

At first I though it was just a kludge to keep us heroic, but no. It happened even if you moved sideways.

Naw. The DM was just using the 1e Rules.

1e DMG p. 25- changing alignment for any class causes a loss of level. You could only get the level back by returning to your original alignment and making atonement.

(Again, this wasn't something that most table I saw enforced, but it did exist)

 

[James Gasik]

I remember those rules. And I never quite got why Alignment was "serious business". Speaking of oddball rules, how about "alignment languages"?

 

[Lanefan]

I remember those rules. And I never quite got why Alignment was "serious business". Speaking of oddball rules, how about "alignment languages"?

Yeah, that's one we never used.

Thieves' (and Assassins') cants eventually went the same way as while they were kept around in our games for ages, nobody ever used them in play.

 

[James Gasik]

On the other hand, as a Planescape fan, I loved the Planar Cant.

Close your bonebox, berk! A clueless prime like you has to learn the dark of the Cant if you ever want to become a knight of the cross-trade!

 

[Fifinjir]

If undead are just cheap robots…you might as well skip a step and put cheap robots in your setting.

 

[James Gasik]

Given the investment and the downsides, I'll stick with Animate Objects over Animate Dead. I had a Warforged Sorcerer who went full Puppetmaster by hiring a local dollmaker to make him some deadly toys.

 

[Lanefan]

Given the investment and the downsides, I'll stick with Animate Objects over Animate Dead. I had a Warforged Sorcerer who went full Puppetmaster by hiring a local dollmaker to make him some deadly toys.

OK, next stupid question - which I-as-player would raise if no-one else did:

Does a lifeless corpse count as an "object" for purposes of Animate Object? If no, why not? If yes, then we're possibly right back in the same rabbit hole you thought you'd just escaped...

 

[James Gasik]

While I get it was a (funny) joke, I will attempt to answer this. Yes. There have been constructs made from dead corpses before, like bone golems. You can totally use Animate Objects to rise the dead from their graves, imbued with the non-evil powers of Transmutation.

But since they are under your complete control, and the only thing they will do is defend themselves from hostiles if you don't command them, and the spell only lasts for a minute they are not inherently evil just annoyingly neutral.

Though I'm sure society will treat you no differently than a vile Necromancer.