I have a question for the group. I always viewed magic as something akin to the force, meaning its more about intent behind the casting makes it light or dark. This brings up the question of how can a lawful good necromancer summon a NE or LE zombie or skeleton, respectively, when they act according to the whims of the caster? Would those that he/she/they create not reflect their own alignment?
But, is the casting of the spells from necromancy inherently evil or is the intent of the casting it evil? It's the whole argument of is there a light or dark side to the force is the drives of the user what determines what is light or dark?
Monster stat blocks are primarily based on "what players encounter" not what "players may create/become" etc. Monster alignment is a tool of the DM and nothing more.
Necromancy in general is neither good or evil. It can raise the dead as undead servants and this is much more likely to be of evil intent but necromancy is also the school of resurrection - bringing creatures back to life and typically to be of good intent. But an evil cleric can use Revivify to torture you to death over and over and over - thus using it for very evil ways. And Create Undead can be used to turn fallen enemies into allies to help bring justice, save damsels in distress and protect the innocent - thus using it for very good things.
Morality, alignment, is not static and is subjective to person, setting, circumstance and other variables.
Alignments are a guide, not a rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I mean, I’d argue that deliberately bringing an evil and destructive creature into the world is an inherently evil act, yeah, regardless of constructive intent. But evil doesn’t mean impermissible or inexcusable.
That calculus is peculiar to spells like animate dead though. It depends on the spell, and D&D morality is a lot more permissive than Star Wars (fireball would be dark side in Star Wars).
It may be different according to setting, but in forgotten realms at least, creating undead is considered evil by good aligned deities and commoners.
There may be (and probably is) some niche morally grey group that uses it for good, but they are a minority and I'm sure wouldn't be liked by the masses.
I think DxJxC hit the nail on the head. One could interpret that the stat-block for player-introduced monsters to be the common perception by others (including deities) and less about the player's own alignment.
There was a thread regarding how to handle good-aligned monsters with evil-aligned stat-blocks. Several comments mentioned perceptions of the stereotypes based on the official stat-blocks.
For example (from a stream): A party accidentally raised 60 skeletons, but they commanded the skeletons to rebuild a nearby town that had fallen into ruin. The town reacted in horror until they were tired of being horrified.
(The alignment of the skeletons themselves is questionable as their curse was created with honorable intentions - the people willingly became cursed to continue to build in honor of a well-loved architect - as well as the one who initiated the whole summoning always has good intentions... but the results of requests are sometimes a bit... terrifying. They want to do good. The Wielder wants them to do good. Something always goes wrong, and people's horror is validated. It has now become a bartering agreement. They all decide what horrible thing must happen so the skeletons can do what they need to do.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Necromancy has no morality. Its simply a classification of a type of spell. No more or less. However, the morality of the spells themselves is less clear. Animate dead forces a creature to serve, maybe forcing a curse on the soul of the reanimated (I don't think this is specified, so it's up to the DM), thereby enslaving that being.
From that perspective, an evil act. But is it evil enough to justify not using it? Depends on circumstance.
The same act can be evil and good.
Or maybe the undead are just unintelligent servants. Boring, but reasonable.
I love the moral gray zone. Fantastic chance to roleplay!
I have a question for the group. I always viewed magic as something akin to the force, meaning its more about intent behind the casting makes it light or dark. This brings up the question of how can a lawful good necromancer summon a NE or LE zombie or skeleton, respectively, when they act according to the whims of the caster? Would those that he/she/they create not reflect their own alignment?
Good people do evil things all the time. Evil people do good things all the time. Alignment is complicated.
But, is the casting of the spells from necromancy inherently evil or is the intent of the casting it evil? It's the whole argument of is there a light or dark side to the force is the drives of the user what determines what is light or dark?
Monster stat blocks are primarily based on "what players encounter" not what "players may create/become" etc. Monster alignment is a tool of the DM and nothing more.
Necromancy in general is neither good or evil. It can raise the dead as undead servants and this is much more likely to be of evil intent but necromancy is also the school of resurrection - bringing creatures back to life and typically to be of good intent. But an evil cleric can use Revivify to torture you to death over and over and over - thus using it for very evil ways. And Create Undead can be used to turn fallen enemies into allies to help bring justice, save damsels in distress and protect the innocent - thus using it for very good things.
Morality, alignment, is not static and is subjective to person, setting, circumstance and other variables.
Alignments are a guide, not a rule.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I mean, I’d argue that deliberately bringing an evil and destructive creature into the world is an inherently evil act, yeah, regardless of constructive intent. But evil doesn’t mean impermissible or inexcusable.
That calculus is peculiar to spells like animate dead though. It depends on the spell, and D&D morality is a lot more permissive than Star Wars (fireball would be dark side in Star Wars).
It may be different according to setting, but in forgotten realms at least, creating undead is considered evil by good aligned deities and commoners.
There may be (and probably is) some niche morally grey group that uses it for good, but they are a minority and I'm sure wouldn't be liked by the masses.
I think DxJxC hit the nail on the head. One could interpret that the stat-block for player-introduced monsters to be the common perception by others (including deities) and less about the player's own alignment.
There was a thread regarding how to handle good-aligned monsters with evil-aligned stat-blocks. Several comments mentioned perceptions of the stereotypes based on the official stat-blocks.
For example (from a stream): A party accidentally raised 60 skeletons, but they commanded the skeletons to rebuild a nearby town that had fallen into ruin. The town reacted in horror until they were tired of being horrified.
(The alignment of the skeletons themselves is questionable as their curse was created with honorable intentions - the people willingly became cursed to continue to build in honor of a well-loved architect - as well as the one who initiated the whole summoning always has good intentions... but the results of requests are sometimes a bit... terrifying. They want to do good. The Wielder wants them to do good. Something always goes wrong, and people's horror is validated. It has now become a bartering agreement. They all decide what horrible thing must happen so the skeletons can do what they need to do.)
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I love this discussion!
Necromancy has no morality. Its simply a classification of a type of spell. No more or less. However, the morality of the spells themselves is less clear. Animate dead forces a creature to serve, maybe forcing a curse on the soul of the reanimated (I don't think this is specified, so it's up to the DM), thereby enslaving that being.
From that perspective, an evil act. But is it evil enough to justify not using it? Depends on circumstance.
The same act can be evil and good.
Or maybe the undead are just unintelligent servants. Boring, but reasonable.
I love the moral gray zone. Fantastic chance to roleplay!
Necromancy generally creates evil creatures. It isn't evil though. For more information on this, I recommend going to other threads.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms