l have watched the amazing story of astoshan the grey necromancer (link to playlist to watch his epic tale) and got to wondering,how do other dms view/have necromancy in their worlds?
Do the people in the world view it as simple recycling,something good and useful and a common thing?
Do they see it as a evil sin against nature and all that is good,something only the most evil monsters would be sick enough to use?
Or something in the middle?
So here l am,makeing this,to ask you,how do you have necromancy in your worlds?
I find it hard to justify "good" necromancy. It involves taking consent away from a creature about what happens to it after it dies. Most of the time it involves enslaving a creature's soul, or using their body without permission.
I have a Circle of Spores druid in my campaign. I'm going to be watching her alignment carefully when she gets Raise Dead next level.
I mean, I didn't need someone's consent when I exploded them with a fireball. Being reduced to kibble is surely a violation of someone's bodily autonomy. Likewise, getting turned into a meaty red paste by a maul-wielding raging barbarian tortle. Why so squeamish about enslaving someone's soul? Is that really worse than sending someone to be turned into a soul coin in the hells? You're willing to butcher people's earthly bodies, but doing damage to their spiritual bodies is too far?
In my campaigns, I don't have any player necromancers, but I view the school of magic as a tool, like any other. A knife doesn't decide where it is used and can also be used for evil or good. Despite Divine magic not conforming to Arcane schools, I think you could make a good case -- like in the Troika CRPG Arcanum-- for cure wounds to be a necromantic spell. There are many applications of necromancy in fantasy besides animate dead. Revivify, Raise Dead are hardly evil applications of the school.
I don't think necromancy is inherently evil. Is illusion inherently evil? The only applications seem to deceive people, which hardly seems like a good school of magic. Evocation is largely about destroying things. I think if, yeah, a necromancer moved into a town and started digging up a graveyard for corpses, the locals would likely be miffed. However, if some bandits get turned into bandit zombies, why should people particularly care? I mean, their soul was likely condemned after they started killing and robbing innocents.
Necromancy can be used for good purposes. Good undead do exist as well. Are they unnatural? Sure, but so is all other magic. Is it creepy? Sure, but so can Illusion, Conjuration, Transmutation, and many other forms of magic. Can it be used for evil? Yes, so can all other magic, and all weapons.
It depends on the caster. Evil necromancer that wants to build a tower out of bodies to summon Orcus.
Evil.
Teenage girl that just wants to bring a family member back to life.
Good.
Necromancy is looked badly upon in my world. It is the black sheep of magic, but villagers are happy if a necromancer uses Undead to save their family's lives.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Well I think studying necromancy and being a necromancer are pretty different.
Necromancy is just it's own school, with things like spare the dying or even life transference I think. Then necromancers will probably take your brother, stab him, and work him to undeath. Pretty different sides of the same magic school coin I say, just don't over do necromancy or use it for evil and you're good.
I agree, all magic is a two-sided coin and can be used for good and evil.
Resurrection spells are typically necromancy (with the exception of reincarnate), and are used mainly for good.
Create Undead and Animate Dead create fundamentally evil creatures, and sure, you can control them for a time, but eventually, if you get desperate or dumb, they will turn on you and innocent creatures.
Necromancers just deeply study the school of magic necromancy. I think they can be good or bad or neutral, but I think think they are all walking a thin line between evil and good, it is a slippery slope, and they need to be careful.
People fear necromancers in my world, because they are darker than most people, and they control undead creatures. Even if they use the undead for good, they are evil, and they do not like you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I am about to start playing a gnome necromancer that is very happy and upbeat. He believes that once a evil person dies, he is saving their soul bye re-animating it from the torture of the nine hell or the abyss. He is Chaotic good and loves people. My DM sees no wrong thing with this(they where surprised though) and his goal is to prove to the world that necromancy can be good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM: So, you doomed the world by betting on dinosauer races instead of doing a quest.
Players: But we got money! Now we can do whatever we want.
The big problem with spells like animate dead is that, even if you don't have any ethical issues with desecration of corpses, reasonably intact dead bodies are a quite limited resource, and methods for supplementing your supply tend to be evil.
The big problem with spells like animate dead is that, even if you don't have any ethical issues with desecration of corpses, reasonably intact dead bodies are a quite limited resource, and methods for supplementing your supply tend to be evil.
oh please,a adventurer kills loads of bandits,kobalds,goblins ect,and useing them is not evil,and there will always be scum to be recycled.
Necromancy is the same as all other magics, can be used for good or evil. It’s just seen as bad by the public. There’s a group of Necromancers in the Necromancer Rights Movement to allow necromancers to practice their craft more, and necromancers have dance parties at the “Raveyard”, where they animate actual zombies to dance Thriller. The main thing that separates lawful and chaotic necromancers is whether or not they ask the deceased permission to raise them.
The big problem with spells like animate dead is that, even if you don't have any ethical issues with desecration of corpses, reasonably intact dead bodies are a quite limited resource, and methods for supplementing your supply tend to be evil.
oh please,a adventurer kills loads of bandits,kobalds,goblins ect,and useing them is not evil,and there will always be scum to be recycled.
This is literally something only a character of Evil alignment would say ^_^
I mean, I didn't need someone's consent when I exploded them with a fireball. Being reduced to kibble is surely a violation of someone's bodily autonomy. Likewise, getting turned into a meaty red paste by a maul-wielding raging barbarian tortle. Why so squeamish about enslaving someone's soul? Is that really worse than sending someone to be turned into a soul coin in the hells? You're willing to butcher people's earthly bodies, but doing damage to their spiritual bodies is too far?
In my campaigns, I don't have any player necromancers, but I view the school of magic as a tool, like any other. A knife doesn't decide where it is used and can also be used for evil or good. Despite Divine magic not conforming to Arcane schools, I think you could make a good case -- like in the Troika CRPG Arcanum-- for cure wounds to be a necromantic spell. There are many applications of necromancy in fantasy besides animate dead. Revivify, Raise Dead are hardly evil applications of the school.
I don't think necromancy is inherently evil. Is illusion inherently evil? The only applications seem to deceive people, which hardly seems like a good school of magic. Evocation is largely about destroying things. I think if, yeah, a necromancer moved into a town and started digging up a graveyard for corpses, the locals would likely be miffed. However, if some bandits get turned into bandit zombies, why should people particularly care? I mean, their soul was likely condemned after they started killing and robbing innocents.
There's an enormous difference between using violence against an opposed faction who are endangering lives, and animating somebody's corpse with a semblance of their former self and enslaving it to your will. Violence can be repurposed for good. It can usually be assumed that a Good character would prefer a peaceful outcome, and will even try for it where possible. Good characters will negotiate first, unless they are in scenarios where such is clearly impossible (e.g. dragon is attacking them, enemies have proven that they have no interest in parley, enemies have slaughtered innocents).
A soldier or police officer using their gun to bring down a man waving a machete is one thing.
Essentially necromancy involves enslavement, as you say. You'd need a better argument than "Why so squeamish" to persuade me that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. The moment your character is glad and willing to enslave others in order to achieve their goals, they are evil alignment.
I mean, I didn't need someone's consent when I exploded them with a fireball. Being reduced to kibble is surely a violation of someone's bodily autonomy. Likewise, getting turned into a meaty red paste by a maul-wielding raging barbarian tortle. Why so squeamish about enslaving someone's soul? Is that really worse than sending someone to be turned into a soul coin in the hells? You're willing to butcher people's earthly bodies, but doing damage to their spiritual bodies is too far?
In my campaigns, I don't have any player necromancers, but I view the school of magic as a tool, like any other. A knife doesn't decide where it is used and can also be used for evil or good. Despite Divine magic not conforming to Arcane schools, I think you could make a good case -- like in the Troika CRPG Arcanum-- for cure wounds to be a necromantic spell. There are many applications of necromancy in fantasy besides animate dead. Revivify, Raise Dead are hardly evil applications of the school.
I don't think necromancy is inherently evil. Is illusion inherently evil? The only applications seem to deceive people, which hardly seems like a good school of magic. Evocation is largely about destroying things. I think if, yeah, a necromancer moved into a town and started digging up a graveyard for corpses, the locals would likely be miffed. However, if some bandits get turned into bandit zombies, why should people particularly care? I mean, their soul was likely condemned after they started killing and robbing innocents.
There's an enormous difference between using violence against an opposed faction who are endangering lives, and animating somebody's corpse with a semblance of their former self and enslaving it to your will. Violence can be repurposed for good. It can usually be assumed that a Good character would prefer a peaceful outcome, and will even try for it where possible. Good characters will negotiate first, unless they are in scenarios where such is clearly impossible (e.g. dragon is attacking them, enemies have proven that they have no interest in parley, enemies have slaughtered innocents).
A soldier or police officer using their gun to bring down a man waving a machete is one thing.
Essentially necromancy involves enslavement, as you say. You'd need a better argument than "Why so squeamish" to persuade me that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. The moment your character is glad and willing to enslave others in order to achieve their goals, they are evil alignment.
My argument isn't that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. My argument is that butchering entire tribes of Orcs for being a nebulous threat doesn't really stack up as a moral act and therefore it must take some amazing calculus to justify bathing in the blood of countless slain foes as morally upstanding while seeing using their spent bodies as weapons is irredeemably evil.
Sorry, but when you break into that dungeon to loot it, you are home-invading the monsters. If anyone is acting in self-defence, it's them. Plus, how often when players go up against bandits, do they kill them to the man. Players in D&D have a kill efficiency that we would find unnerving if it were demonstrated by soldiers in a war, let alone any sort of police force.
I'm sorry, but killing people because you assessed them as a threat doesn't sound like a morally upstanding act. And if we are talking enslavement, then let's not only consider necromancy: enchantment as a school is school with plenty of spells forcing people to act against their will: dominate person, charm person, command, geas. Is Enchantment inherently evil? I would say that constitutes enslavement as much as animate dead does-- at least animate dead is a corpse and not a living breathing person. Illusion also allows someone to manipulate someone by providing faulty sensory information.
If you try to apply modern morality to a game largely about killing things and taking their loot, it's going to fail on every count.
As others have said magic is neither inherently good or bad. Necromancers are typically seen as evil because 1) they raise the dead without the dead's consent and 2) enslave them. Now you might be a good aligned Necromancer, raising the dead to perform menial tasks in a village leaving the villagers to study more craft/skill related jobs. However, you have still enslaved someone. So it all depends on how your world views slavery. There's also the issue of using someone's body without their consent. I seem to recall a post somewhere on these forums about a good aligned Necromancer who only raises the dead of those who signed a contract while alive. And if he was running low on bodies the nearby hospital allowed him use of the morgue but only people who donated their bodies to science.
Essentially necromancy involves enslavement, as you say. You'd need a better argument than "Why so squeamish" to persuade me that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. The moment your character is glad and willing to enslave others in order to achieve their goals, they are evil alignment.
It involves enslaving something, but it's not entirely clear what (is it the ghost of the original owner of the body, or is it some spirit from the shadowfell or something?). Zombies do have IQ 3, so whatever you're enslaving is only on the level of a smart animal.
Zombies don't have souls, at least not in my campaigns. Smarter undead, wights, some skeletons, and wraiths, do have some sentience, but I like to flavor it as some being from the Shadowfell or Negative Energy Plane that is summoned to animate the corpse.
I don't think it is evil to enslave evil beings, especially when you use them in a way that is beneficial to others.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Sorry, but when you break into that dungeon to loot it, you are home-invading the monsters.
Campaigns inclined to pay attention to problems of morality usually have the monsters actually doing something that requires them to be attacked.
Sure, or they might just live in the same cave complex as someone who was doing something. I don't think the Stirges in LMoP were really in on the Black Spider's plans. Or maybe they just live in the same place as a relic or other MacGuffin that the heroes want. Or maybe its a pack of hungry wolves that the heroes meet on the way to the cave where the bad people are. Even campaigns that know morally right from morally wrong, usually have incidental monsters that aren't necessarily doing anything wrong but will eat people if they come into their lair. And let's be honest, "is willing to eat someone if it wanders into its lair" and near a settlement usually is constructed as a reason to eradicate the whole lot of whatever beasties to be put to the sword.
Adventurers kill things for a living. Like I said prior, that's not even really the job description of a soldier. Only an executioner in our societies have such a job description and, in most countries, that job has been completely abolished.
Sure, or they might just live in the same cave complex as someone who was doing something. I don't think the Stirges in LMoP were really in on the Black Spider's plans.
Bear in mind that animate dead only works on humanoids (probably due to a desire to not write rules; it's somewhat odd that it's impossible to create a [monster[Warhorse Skeleton[/monster] or Ogre Zombie with animate dead). The moral issues with zombie cows are different from zombie people.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
l have watched the amazing story of astoshan the grey necromancer (link to playlist to watch his epic tale) and got to wondering,how do other dms view/have necromancy in their worlds?
Do the people in the world view it as simple recycling,something good and useful and a common thing?
Do they see it as a evil sin against nature and all that is good,something only the most evil monsters would be sick enough to use?
Or something in the middle?
So here l am,makeing this,to ask you,how do you have necromancy in your worlds?
I find it hard to justify "good" necromancy. It involves taking consent away from a creature about what happens to it after it dies. Most of the time it involves enslaving a creature's soul, or using their body without permission.
I have a Circle of Spores druid in my campaign. I'm going to be watching her alignment carefully when she gets Raise Dead next level.
I mean, I didn't need someone's consent when I exploded them with a fireball. Being reduced to kibble is surely a violation of someone's bodily autonomy. Likewise, getting turned into a meaty red paste by a maul-wielding raging barbarian tortle. Why so squeamish about enslaving someone's soul? Is that really worse than sending someone to be turned into a soul coin in the hells? You're willing to butcher people's earthly bodies, but doing damage to their spiritual bodies is too far?
In my campaigns, I don't have any player necromancers, but I view the school of magic as a tool, like any other. A knife doesn't decide where it is used and can also be used for evil or good. Despite Divine magic not conforming to Arcane schools, I think you could make a good case -- like in the Troika CRPG Arcanum-- for cure wounds to be a necromantic spell. There are many applications of necromancy in fantasy besides animate dead. Revivify, Raise Dead are hardly evil applications of the school.
I don't think necromancy is inherently evil. Is illusion inherently evil? The only applications seem to deceive people, which hardly seems like a good school of magic. Evocation is largely about destroying things. I think if, yeah, a necromancer moved into a town and started digging up a graveyard for corpses, the locals would likely be miffed. However, if some bandits get turned into bandit zombies, why should people particularly care? I mean, their soul was likely condemned after they started killing and robbing innocents.
Necromancy can be used for good purposes. Good undead do exist as well. Are they unnatural? Sure, but so is all other magic. Is it creepy? Sure, but so can Illusion, Conjuration, Transmutation, and many other forms of magic. Can it be used for evil? Yes, so can all other magic, and all weapons.
It depends on the caster. Evil necromancer that wants to build a tower out of bodies to summon Orcus.
Evil.
Teenage girl that just wants to bring a family member back to life.
Good.
Necromancy is looked badly upon in my world. It is the black sheep of magic, but villagers are happy if a necromancer uses Undead to save their family's lives.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Well I think studying necromancy and being a necromancer are pretty different.
Necromancy is just it's own school, with things like spare the dying or even life transference I think. Then necromancers will probably take your brother, stab him, and work him to undeath. Pretty different sides of the same magic school coin I say, just don't over do necromancy or use it for evil and you're good.
Also known as CrafterB and DankMemer.
Here, have some homebrew classes! Subclasses to? Why not races. Feats, feats as well. I have a lot of magic items. Lastly I got monsters, fun, fun times.
I agree, all magic is a two-sided coin and can be used for good and evil.
Resurrection spells are typically necromancy (with the exception of reincarnate), and are used mainly for good.
Create Undead and Animate Dead create fundamentally evil creatures, and sure, you can control them for a time, but eventually, if you get desperate or dumb, they will turn on you and innocent creatures.
Necromancers just deeply study the school of magic necromancy. I think they can be good or bad or neutral, but I think think they are all walking a thin line between evil and good, it is a slippery slope, and they need to be careful.
People fear necromancers in my world, because they are darker than most people, and they control undead creatures. Even if they use the undead for good, they are evil, and they do not like you.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I am about to start playing a gnome necromancer that is very happy and upbeat. He believes that once a evil person dies, he is saving their soul bye re-animating it from the torture of the nine hell or the abyss. He is Chaotic good and loves people. My DM sees no wrong thing with this(they where surprised though) and his goal is to prove to the world that necromancy can be good.
DM: So, you doomed the world by betting on dinosauer races instead of doing a quest.
Players: But we got money! Now we can do whatever we want.
DM: You are all dead, you can't spend your money!
Players: Oh.
The big problem with spells like animate dead is that, even if you don't have any ethical issues with desecration of corpses, reasonably intact dead bodies are a quite limited resource, and methods for supplementing your supply tend to be evil.
oh please,a adventurer kills loads of bandits,kobalds,goblins ect,and useing them is not evil,and there will always be scum to be recycled.
Necromancy is the same as all other magics, can be used for good or evil. It’s just seen as bad by the public. There’s a group of Necromancers in the Necromancer Rights Movement to allow necromancers to practice their craft more, and necromancers have dance parties at the “Raveyard”, where they animate actual zombies to dance Thriller. The main thing that separates lawful and chaotic necromancers is whether or not they ask the deceased permission to raise them.
This is literally something only a character of Evil alignment would say ^_^
There's an enormous difference between using violence against an opposed faction who are endangering lives, and animating somebody's corpse with a semblance of their former self and enslaving it to your will. Violence can be repurposed for good. It can usually be assumed that a Good character would prefer a peaceful outcome, and will even try for it where possible. Good characters will negotiate first, unless they are in scenarios where such is clearly impossible (e.g. dragon is attacking them, enemies have proven that they have no interest in parley, enemies have slaughtered innocents).
A soldier or police officer using their gun to bring down a man waving a machete is one thing.
Essentially necromancy involves enslavement, as you say. You'd need a better argument than "Why so squeamish" to persuade me that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. The moment your character is glad and willing to enslave others in order to achieve their goals, they are evil alignment.
My argument isn't that there isn't something inherently wrong with enslaving people. My argument is that butchering entire tribes of Orcs for being a nebulous threat doesn't really stack up as a moral act and therefore it must take some amazing calculus to justify bathing in the blood of countless slain foes as morally upstanding while seeing using their spent bodies as weapons is irredeemably evil.
Sorry, but when you break into that dungeon to loot it, you are home-invading the monsters. If anyone is acting in self-defence, it's them. Plus, how often when players go up against bandits, do they kill them to the man. Players in D&D have a kill efficiency that we would find unnerving if it were demonstrated by soldiers in a war, let alone any sort of police force.
I'm sorry, but killing people because you assessed them as a threat doesn't sound like a morally upstanding act. And if we are talking enslavement, then let's not only consider necromancy: enchantment as a school is school with plenty of spells forcing people to act against their will: dominate person, charm person, command, geas. Is Enchantment inherently evil? I would say that constitutes enslavement as much as animate dead does-- at least animate dead is a corpse and not a living breathing person. Illusion also allows someone to manipulate someone by providing faulty sensory information.
If you try to apply modern morality to a game largely about killing things and taking their loot, it's going to fail on every count.
Campaigns inclined to pay attention to problems of morality usually have the monsters actually doing something that requires them to be attacked.
As others have said magic is neither inherently good or bad. Necromancers are typically seen as evil because 1) they raise the dead without the dead's consent and 2) enslave them. Now you might be a good aligned Necromancer, raising the dead to perform menial tasks in a village leaving the villagers to study more craft/skill related jobs. However, you have still enslaved someone. So it all depends on how your world views slavery. There's also the issue of using someone's body without their consent. I seem to recall a post somewhere on these forums about a good aligned Necromancer who only raises the dead of those who signed a contract while alive. And if he was running low on bodies the nearby hospital allowed him use of the morgue but only people who donated their bodies to science.
It involves enslaving something, but it's not entirely clear what (is it the ghost of the original owner of the body, or is it some spirit from the shadowfell or something?). Zombies do have IQ 3, so whatever you're enslaving is only on the level of a smart animal.
Zombies don't have souls, at least not in my campaigns. Smarter undead, wights, some skeletons, and wraiths, do have some sentience, but I like to flavor it as some being from the Shadowfell or Negative Energy Plane that is summoned to animate the corpse.
I don't think it is evil to enslave evil beings, especially when you use them in a way that is beneficial to others.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Sure, or they might just live in the same cave complex as someone who was doing something. I don't think the Stirges in LMoP were really in on the Black Spider's plans. Or maybe they just live in the same place as a relic or other MacGuffin that the heroes want. Or maybe its a pack of hungry wolves that the heroes meet on the way to the cave where the bad people are. Even campaigns that know morally right from morally wrong, usually have incidental monsters that aren't necessarily doing anything wrong but will eat people if they come into their lair. And let's be honest, "is willing to eat someone if it wanders into its lair" and near a settlement usually is constructed as a reason to eradicate the whole lot of whatever beasties to be put to the sword.
Adventurers kill things for a living. Like I said prior, that's not even really the job description of a soldier. Only an executioner in our societies have such a job description and, in most countries, that job has been completely abolished.
Bear in mind that animate dead only works on humanoids (probably due to a desire to not write rules; it's somewhat odd that it's impossible to create a [monster[Warhorse Skeleton[/monster] or Ogre Zombie with animate dead). The moral issues with zombie cows are different from zombie people.