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.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'll go even better. Are rats evil?

They are the air craft carriers of the Black Plague, but possums exist, so just by comparison, they're not.

 

[James Gasik]

In all fairness, not all rats are diseased in 5e. I was thinking of rats in a specific adventure that carry disease, but the ones on the Monster Manual do not. So asking if "Conjure Animals to summon diseased rats would be inherently evil" is probably not an appropriate question. On the other hand, poison has long been associated with evil actions in D&D, and you could totally conjure a poisonous creature...

 

[Redwizard007]

I love these threads.

OoG
Guy: why is it evil to animate a mindless killing machine? I'll use its rotting, disease infested corpse to grow food and dig wells and stuff.
Food service worker: you want it to do what?
IG
Tavern patron: why is there a rotting finger in my ale? Are you cutting up bodies in the back room?
Tavern Owner: not again...
Regular patron: it's no big deal. The local priest can cast cure disease for 100gp

 

[Baron Opal II]

I'll go even better. Are rats evil?

Only after warpstone exposure.

 

[Mournblade94]

How and disease immune creatures whose flesh in inedible bring disease and pests?

Is it being preserved by magic? If not it's carrying all kinds of micro organisms and maggots.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Is it being preserved by magic?

Yes.

That is the point of created undead. They are corpses animated and preserved by magic.

edit: And you know what creature carries the most human pathogens? Humans.

So again QED Humans are evil.

 

[James Gasik]

Yes.

That is the point of created undead. They are corpses animated and preserved by magic.

edit: And you know what creature carries the most human pathogens? Humans.

So again QED Humans are evil.

Well duh, humans are the greatest monsters, everyone knows that. We go into the homes of innocent kobolds trying to survive in a harsh world where everything is against them, murder them and take their stuff to sell for copper pieces at the nearest merchant! In what world is that NOT evil?

Oh right, D&D campaign worlds.

 

[Mournblade94]

Yes.

That is the point of created undead. They are corpses animated and preserved by magic.

edit: And you know what creature carries the most human pathogens? Humans.

So again QED Humans are evil.

Great! And now when they get defeated you've got rotting corpses all over the place. I'm not sure animate dead says it's preserving the corpses. Humans and rotting corpses have never been on the same level of danger. There's a reason we hsve an evolutionary aversion to the smell of rotting meat.

In any case necromancy is the magic of disease and contagion if you look at the other spells. It's also eternally putting souls in torment. I can't see am argument for it being anything other than evil.

It violates the circle of life in nature, and drains vitality. It's a malevolent force.

 

[Mournblade94]

Well duh, humans are the greatest monsters, everyone knows that. We go into the homes of innocent kobolds trying to survive in a harsh world where everything is against them, murder them and take their stuff to sell for copper pieces at the nearest merchant! In what world is that NOT evil?

Oh right, D&D campaign worlds.

Kobold are never innocent !

 

[Lanefan]

There is no way to justify animating dead as a good act. I always play it as evil, and off limits for Good aligned creatures.

Agreed, though it's not off-limits to Good creatures; they just have to think twice on using it if really necessary, and repeated use might quickly see them not be Good much longer.

First every druid or nature spirit should be against it, not just good creatures. Corpses are corrupt physically. They bring disease, and they bring pests, so on a practical level there is nothing good about spreading either of those. The principles of necromancy drain life and prevent healing.

You'd think, right? But in RAW 1e at least, all the Cure xxxxx Wounds spells are necromantic; and curing something is far more often a Good act than an Evil one.

It promotes suffering, both for those that have died.

I think necromancy is the only magic that is directly evil.

Animate Dead is IMO evil. Some other necromantic spells might be just as "non-evil" as any other damage-dealing magic.