Necromancy sucks

...

What about willing necromancy?
Or, if you're a huge dick and you know you're going to end up in hell/eternal torment, wouldn't it be better to just be a skeleton instead?

Yo, dawg, I've heard you don't want to face eternal torment, so I've sticked you in a skeleton, so you'll suffer from eternal torment while avoiding eternal torment.

This. The Skeleton Workers union demands rights! Equal pay to breathing workers! Breaks for applying bone lacquer!

SKELLINGTONS ON STRIKE! SKELLINGTONS ON STRIKE!

Guys! Guys!

Using fire spells turns you into FIRE! You can't cast fire spells unless you are FIRE!

What's the difference? Skeletons are non-sentient and obey orders. There's SOME sentient undead, but necromancers usually don't/can't raise it.

Just give the player what they want, then force them to live with the consequences.

>Necromancer perfects cheap, easy skeleton automaton for menial labor
>bottom immediately drops out of the job market as skeletons can do the work of two or three men with no breaks for eating or sleep, and no pay
>millions starve
>peasants are dragged out of their homes and murdered by roving bands of corpse mongers who sell fresh bodies to wizards to make more skeletons to fill the demand
>tin pot warlords crop up, power seized base solely on how many skeletons they can field
>shambling bone armies smash each other endlessly on the battlefield, corpses being re-raised the next day
>the only infrastructure that can be attacked are centers of industry and the source of bodies - population centers
>even more peasants are dragged out of their homes and murdered by roving bands of murder skeletons sent by their eldritch masters to harvest them before the enemy can

NECROMANCY ISN'T EVIL GAIS.

Explain to me why being a skeleton is worse, or comparable to, eternal divine torment.

What about a necromancer who only raises people who bloody well deserve it or animals?
Gets his corpses from the state, executed criminals and the like.

You still have to worry about rotting flesh spreading disease, breaking customs, laws and traditions and going against general good taste, but at least you aren't doing something cosmically labelled als Capital E Evil

>What's the difference?
Depends on a setting. But in most of them necromancy involves defying natural order and disturbing the peace of the dead.

Let him go about being a necromancer
His views on being a necromancer is that it isnt inherently evil and he does what he does with good intentions
However, people around him dont see it that way, they still see the dark art of necromancy doing things it shouldn't do
There is a large difference in what a person perceives as right and wrong and what the general public sees as right and wrong

>Why it's always skeletons and zombies? Not elementals, not golems, not homunculi, it's always undead
Provided materials. Wherever PCs go, they leave bodies. So, the player figures he can put them to use as a Necromancer.

Being raised as non-sentient undead is akin to being lobotomized. You technically live, but it's not you anymore, it's a bone carcass that's under necromancer's control, with your soul trapped inside. If you want to avoid Hell and enjoy it, you probably want to become a lich or a vampire instead.
Being in Hell is not even that bad - you can even shed the shackles of the opressed and become an opressor yourself yourself. Sure, it's just a lemur for a start, but you can ascend further.

>People use a thing to do evil
>So obviously, the thing itself is evil.

Are you retarded?

This isn't like fucking guns, user. Skeletons are not a right, and there is no fair and reasonable way to limit the proliferation of skeletons. It's a can of worms that destroys society when it's opened.

>skeletons can do the work of two or three men with no breaks for eating or sleep, and no pay
>the farm work of three men
>skeletons don't need to eat
>somehow people starve
>people who have skeleton guards are now easier to kill and rob when they were alive
>bandits never robbed people before but do it now that skeletons are everywhere
>necromancers raise skeleton armies, something they never did before
>people being killed for war is somehow worse than people being killed in war
I can understand that you're a fun hating homo, but at least try not to be retarded.

But it is. All the undead, even non-sentient like zombies and skeletons, has Evil in their alignment. Not neutral like wild animals or golems or homunculi, evil. Raising undead is always evil, because it involves bringing more evil into the world.

I'm about to start some necromancy shenanigans with my war cleric, raising the enemies who have fought against us and forcing them to fight against their former allies. Possibly raising the odd ally so they can get revenge on the enemy

>Alignments
Have you tried not playing DnD?

Oh boy, are we seeing the proto-NNA here? The National Necromancy Association? Will I only pull your cold dead hands from your cold dead hands? Gonna talk about how the skeleton was a sovereign right guaranteed by the founding fathers?

Eliminating scarcity without adjusting society to suit it leads to tragedy. Why do they need them? Do you think things will magically suddenly cost nothing? Do you think every nation will have equal amounts of skeletons all at once? Do you think people won't use the new skeleton automata to exploit their fellow man? With no more value for their labor, people have nothing to contribute for money. They can't buy food. Their lords could feed them, but why?

For their bodies. For more skeletons.

People become fucking cattle. At least a serf is more valuable to his duke alive than dead. Skeleton Cattle is only valuable until it grows to full age, when it's slaughtered so it's corpse can be used to feed the Military Skeleton complex.

No jobs = no pay
No pay = no food
Shockingly enough, the time it takes for a society to drop the "you must work for your bread" mentality is significantly longer than it takes for someone to starve to death.

Speak for yourself wagecuck.

>Skeletons are not a right,
FUCK YOU, I WAS BORN WITH A SKELETON INSIDE ME.

Not an argument.

>not playing a heartful nekoromancer

What are you, straight?

>>skeletons can do the work of two or three men with no breaks for eating or sleep, and no pay
>>the farm work of three men
>>skeletons don't need to eat
>>somehow people starve

Because they don't have a job, and thus no money. No money = no food = starving.

The problem isn't production, it's distribution. If you automate everything, that just creates a permanently unemployed class that lives in poverty. Sure, the people who control the skeletons benefit, but everyone else is shit out of luck.

>he doesn't suck dicks 24/7
lol cis

>People become fucking cattle.
No. People adapt. They learn new skills to get jobs to feed themselves and their loved ones. Ones that, ideally cannot be replaced by a mindless skeleton.

If the people can be killed and starved en masse like that and do nothing about it then they were always cattle.
>being this stuck in servant mentality
As long as the food is getting made people will get to eat, do you really think that the higher ups would just burn all the food so they can starve the peasants? Society doesn't need to adjust that much, it can be practically the same except people oversee skeletons doing their work rather than working themselves. Even if skeleton owners stop making food, farmers would start making it and we'd be back to square one.

Veeky Forums -Ethics, Economics, and Necromancy

>people with no education or training in advance adapt to feed their families

your right, they become fucking criminals. Probably the same bandits killing and harvesting people for their skeletons

>Farmers would start making it

The lords skeleton knights come by and burn your farm to the ground and steal your food. Oh, and congrats, you are now conscripted into the skeleton army.

Post scarcity is a meme and you aren't gonna see it in a fucking medieval tier world no matter how much labor you eliminate.

Look up White Necromancer

Yes, it is shitty

I don't see a problem with the kind of necromancer who is getting undead to do all the menial labour instituting some kind of social welfare program.

Bread and circuses. Free grain and regular extreme action in the skelly arena should be enough to have the people over-look your 'crimes against nature'.

>Four ears
>FOUR EARS
>I'm fucking triggered

Alright, let's assume all this dumb shit actually does happen. What's stopping people from doing all of that without skeletons? Also, why aren't paladins popping up to put down tyrannical rulers? Heroes are always killing the big bad necromancer, why is it that suddenly there's no resistance from anyone anywhere?

>my setting has rules you are not allowed to go against, no exceptions
>you want to play something? too bad, in my setting you can't have that
>X is inherently Y, X can never be Z
jeez, just let your players have fun, it's true that the PCs have to exist within the setting, but it's just as true that the setting has to conform to the players as well

We come full circle. The player wanted necromancy and he got it. Now, having seen the fruits of his wicked works, he cries out for the salvation of the sword. "Save me from what I have wrought!"

Necromancy has been proven evil. The player loses.

Deus Vult. Let the purging begin.

>As long as the food is getting made people will get to eat, do you really think that the higher ups would just burn all the food so they can starve the peasants?
Burn it, no. Stuff their faces at gigantic feasts that only they can afford? Fuck yes. Starving the filthy peasants is just a bonus. At long last, the dregs of man no longer need be tolerated by their betters by cruel necessity! The death of the lower classes can only lead to the ennobling of man as a whole. Now that they are not needed in the fields, they can be disposed of.

You conveniently ignored the main point of my post, what is stopping people from becoming tyrants anywhere at any time? If the sword can be used to put down a peasant then the sword must be evil, and the metal that it's made from, and the smith who hammered it.
Hey, it sure worked well for the French.

If necromancers rule everywhere and are this ingrained into society, mighty paladins are probably already dead.

paladins only need to kill evil necromancers, a necromancer can use his knowledge of life and death to be a doctor, without having to resort to prayer

Why necromancy is always about forcing and slaving others? Why do always people assume being undead is suffering?

I mean, necromancy could be similar to LotR, one guy with some control over the undead talking to them to come and work with him, with the chance to leave after they are done. And even if they can't feel many things (like drinking a cold bear or boning a woman), there's still other ways to have fun.

Fuck, even if unconscious and unable to feel a shit because magic shenanigans, still better than burning in hell.

you be like the one from diablo, his skeletons are more like bone puppets

Can you kill a god? Can you kill all of them? Unless you do paladins can be born, warriors and mages can learn holy magic and we will reach our balance of terror that you're all so attached to.
That as well.

Why are you guys so obsessed with the notion that everyone is absolutely evil and evil cannot be opposed? Are you just projecting your own total lack of morals or are you mentally enslaved to contemporary pessimistic memes?

I played a necromancer, he animated corpes akin to animating rope. The GM accepted. Pretty fun campaign, made an army, protected a city.

But all necromancers are evil, user.

Depends on the setting, your version of necromancy is one of many.

even one who just minds his own business, and provides affordable medical care, without regard to religious affiliation?

>You conveniently ignored the main point of my post, what is stopping people from becoming tyrants anywhere at any time?

Logistics and Economic forces that necessitate civilization. You remove both by removing labor.

You can be a doctor without animating corpses, user. Being knowledgeable in anatomy isn't a trait inherent to necromancers, and necromancers don't get any healing spells either.

i always thought that animating corpses is a side effect of learning anatomy, and they don't get healing spells because they can do it non-magically

eh, depends on the setting

Where did this necromancy based post scarcity society come from anyway?

some people like to take things really far, and because evokers using lightning bolt to power machines isnt as catchy

But a cleric can animate the dead as well (at least in D&D 5e they can)

Why is enslaving an elemental spirit to power your golem any better than using a negative energy battery to animate a corpse?

Skeletons and zombies don't use a soul. You can quite literally trap someone in a soul jar or some shit and then animate their corpse. I don't even think someone who's in the afterlife is aware that their body has been turned into a puppet, unless it's explicitly a kind of undead that binds the soul.

Also, if you're in the Forgotten Realms, being a lobotomized corpse is still better than being stuck in asshat Kelemvor's Wall of the Faithless.

Happy now?

generally, i always play good or neutral characters
but i also like playing many different archetypes, so it would be nice to have all options available to me, without having to resort to alignment changes which shouldnt even be a factor when deciding your character

And yet there are many cases where tyrants come up in the real world, starving the peasants and taking everything, but people usually resist when this happens. Out of the world that came before our current society was formed, I think that's proof enough that once most people have nothing to do because of improved methods of completing manual labor they will get educated and start pursuing something else. Necromancy can just be like this, so really it's up to society to work itself out, and it will either end in a massive improvement to everyone's way of life, or a minor loss in quality of life to people who are clearly living under tyrants already.

I never understood Veeky Forums obsession with being good necromancer or lich and starting industrial revolution with necromancy.Most of times you`ll be much better off with normal magic and golems for such job.
Personally I love necromancy but whole "good necromancer" is really off putting.

What in the fuck.

>but people usually resist when this happens

Tyrants don't usually have undying never ending armies, retard.

You change the way the game is played, you change the outcomes.

I hate it when players pull this shit off because they never put any thought into their character beyond 'He's a necromancer but he's GOOD and RIGHT', with any and all conversations being segued into how enlightened they are for making undead.

Can't make a zombie/skeleton without contributing to the evil god of undeath/necromancy, so shut up and pick something interesting.

Got a chuckle out of me.

Why do people star discussions about issues that completely and entirely depend on the setting without specifying a setting? Maybe necromancy requires evil acts, maybe it doesn't really require active villainy but disturbs the natural order of things by its very nature, maybe it is a neutral thing whose negative reputation is mostly due to people's views on death, the dead and spooky shit, maybe it's a sacred and respected form of magic that allows the dead to remain a part of the society they've helped build. It depends on the fucking setting.

underrated posts

And what about anyone who uses holy anything? What about other leaders who will oppose them? If anything it's better for the common people who don't have to die in horrible wars because skeletons take their place in armies. Either way eventually tyrants get to the point where everyone leaves to a society not run by a giant cunt or dies, then you just have the generic necromancer BBEG that's always starting up somewhere anyway, except this time some other leaders also have skeleton armies to oppose them rather than just getting run over by them and having their villages burned and peasants slaughtered until some douchebag heroes decide to get off their asses and kill Baddy McBones the 100000th.
Or let me guess you're talking about a world where everything is ruled by one person and they have absolute say in everything, a society of course that would never result in brutal tyranny without skeletons.

There's an official D&D adventure based on that very premises. Well instead of a utopia he just wanted to had servants and raised his familiar.

Sounds fine except in D&D Necromancer is synonymous with "Soul-torture." God were so worried pissed they sent a preist to give him a warning and tell him to free the undead souls and stop, or else he will be judged harshly when he dies.

Guys panicked and became a lich... Adventurers killed him.

Morale of the story:

Depends On Setting.

However in most D&D worlds, it's a form of torture for the deceased. So it doesn't matter your good intentions, you are scarring eternal beings for menial labor.

Evil.

I raise willing ancestors from death to protect my family, as they had before me and as I will be a part of if I were to be slain.

Skeletons cost at least 25gp worth of obsidian to create, along with the services of a magic-user and regular maintenance to prevent decay and repair damage.

Peasant farmers cost 1gp per year, can be taxed to retrieve a portion of that investment, are self-replicating and also look nicer, at least from a distance.

The constant oversight required for skeleton workers to not botch jobs involving even minorly-skillful manual labor is akin to that required by golems, save for being caused by a lack of intelligence rather than internal objection to being mistreated. They're best used in a remotely-controlled capacity for work that doesn't suit the living, such as dealing with hazardous waste or using mercury to make hats.

OP specified enough about a non-specific setting's Necromancy to base the discussion off of.

then you are TACITLY ACKNOWLEDGING necromancy is EVIL thus DEFEATING THE ORIGINAL POINT OF THE THREAD

state necromancers are probably the way to get away with necro shenanigans in a totally not-completelly-evil way in alot of settings i would suspect, could even set it up so that your individual skellies (if its a setting where the soul is required to animate them anyway) are individually "sentenced" and can only be used by the necro for a set period of time before being put to final rest
but oh well jus ebils i suppose

But once the purges are over isn't the new society a considerably better place to live in, though?

In your scenario, it's inherently evil. If your player doesn't understand why, break it down into three parts:

> Forced Labor:
Even if Slavery is normally acceptable, this takes it one step further in that it requires the person to continue to work constantly. Even something as the bible would prohibit overworking the slaves or over-beating of them. Plus if your setting happens to be against slavery, then it'd be a two fold problem.
>Prohibits Death
From the way you make it sound, the necromancer stops all attempts to reach an afterlife. This would not only disrupt the natural balance of things (Likely bringing a divine agent from both death and life after him) but it would also be denying a basic right to death. Even if it's done against criminals, this is still an inhumane torture.
> The Pain:
This is perhaps the largest one. Constant pain and suffering, on a level high enough to be at least mentioned. This is not even counting the emotional pain of being stripped from peace or being constantly worked with no prospects of rest. Or the pain of the living, from seeing Great-Grandpa working the fields, his rotting flesh slowly falling from his bones as he toils the same fields he has for hundreds of years, now only forced to do it like a common slave.

All in all, there is no 'Utopia' to be found with necromancy. At best, this Utopia would benefit the living, and make harm for the dead. Any cleric of ANY religion should see this an afront to the natural balance of things, and would want to stop it. Average citizens would be in fear of the necromancer, both out of fear of their own afterlife, and the afterlife of their loved ones. And hell, even the evil individuals would fear it. After all, once they die, will they end up stuck in some menial task for the rest of their days? At least in an afterlife, they have a chance for something better.

Hence, this is clearly evil.

plus elementals can be hard to control depending, and golems/homunculi range from not insanely useful to gorram expensive
but skellies get made everytime the murderhobos play for more then 5 minutes

It could be handled like indentured servitude, if you die with debts then state repossesses your corpse and puts it to work until they're paid off (plus the additional costs of reanimating, of course).

was thinking more along the lines of replacing vague life sentences
no mr axe murderer
your sentenced to 186 years and your gonna fucking serve them

>Annoying the GM is fun

You are the worst type of person. Not player. Person.

Well, I'd say that sorts everything out.

I must have missed the part of my post where I said necromancy could only be used for evil. I suppose it's my fault for expecting you to understand that there are going to be other societies with necromancy that aren't ruled by a giant cunt without me spelling it out for you. Thank you also for capitalizing most of your post for emphasis so I can know you're as angry as you are stupid. So let me be absolutely clear here. Necromancy is a tool. Tools can be used for good or evil depending on the user. If it does not corrupt its users or force them to be evil and society becomes ruled solely by evil people then it's society that's evil inherently. If society is evil by default then there's really no damage that can be done by adding necromancy to the mix. It's the same as anything that gives power, why doesn't the benevolent wizard that protects the town just burn it all down for his entertainment? Why don't heroes just turn on the common people and become evil? It all depends on the people; if a good person gets power they use it for good, if an evil person gets power they use it for evil.

Let's say raising undead minions is evil (scrub-tier necromancer), what exactly about necromancy's other uses is inherently evil? Why is summoning fire to burn your enemies alive or using enchantment to control them not evil?

Savage

>Be able to speak with the dead
>not everyone dies in peacefully in fantasy world
>a lot of angry and sad spirits
>"Oi spooks, you protect me from harm, help me get shit done, and I'll help you find peace via revenge/delivering a message/completing a task
>"sounds good meatbag"
>you now have spirits willing to be bound to skeletal forms
>the contract is withheld, spirit rips in peace
>you break the contract, suffer the wrath of the dead
>gods of balance like nerull look favorably on you
>some spirits, possibly some heroes who simply refuse to rest, will stick with you long term if they agree with your actions

Refusing to see necromancy as anything but cackling dyels in a dungeon is a shortcoming of the DM

Because the retards who make these systems still use alignment charts and don't want to think about it too much.

So it's all just lazy writing.

>samefag

You outright ask where the paladins and holy men are, then say "BUT I NEVER SAID NECROMANCY WAS EVIL LEL"

If the forces of good are anathema to it, it's evil. Shithead.

Yes but it's easier to just see them as evil and nothing else, so you get retards like OP who constantly whine when someone tries to be different and to do something different with a class.

...

>OPs Post
>From wording presumably OP is the DM, unless he comes back to say otherwise this will be considered a safe assumption.
>OP's post says: " it traps souls in rotting bodies and brings them great pain, as they are unable to ascend to the afterlife."
>Followed by "it twists and corrupts nature"

>In OPs setting these are facts. Your opinion, fellow user, on how your version of necromancer does not matter. We are in OP's world now.

Now you may progress forward discussing if Necromancy is evil or not. Please note you should also be answering if Trapped Souls, Causing Great Pain, Pressed against will, and Corruption are evil or not.

Now this thread may continue.

>However in most D&D worlds, it's a form of torture for the deceased

That can be debated. In 3.5, depending on the level of undead created, there could be no semblance of soul attached. Raising your poor old uncle as a mummy, vampire or ghoul is certainly torture...but Skeletons and Zombies have no soulstuff in them, just a scant touch of negative energy to act as the strings moving the bones and meat along.