What do you think of undead OOC?

[randomhero00]

I suppose it'd depend on the type of undead. I'm specifically interested in what you all think of sentient, non-parasitic type undead (in other words, that don't need to feed on the living)?

Personally I see nothing wrong with them. Its just another type of afterlife. Most of my characters see it this way too unless they're a druid or something.

Philosophically I see them as the yin from the yang. Just another side of the coin. Not inherently evil. They just decided to stick around longer, no big deal really. Now of course it just so happens most of them tend to be evil...but that's more of a correlation (err or is it coincidence?)

[Urpriest]

Lots of undead, even those that don't eat people to live, are Always Evil. I'd interpret that as the process of undeath magically twisting their personalities. It's what's caused my egypt-themed campaign setting to slide into decadence, as most leaders become mummies after death, and mummies are almost all lawful evil.

[Jack_Simth]

I suppose it'd depend on the type of undead. I'm specifically interested in what you all think of sentient, non-parasitic type undead (in other words, that don't need to feed on the living)?

Personally I see nothing wrong with them. Its just another type of afterlife. Most of my characters see it this way too unless they're a druid or something.With a handful of exceptions, even the non-feeding undead are Evil. Seriously, in Core, there are *two* undead that do not include both "Always" and "Evil" in their alignment description. The Mummy is "Usually" Evil, while the Ghost is "Any". There's... what, 18 different undead in Core?

[Calmness]

I don't know. Aren't undead made of negative energy? I was under the impression that negative energy was only good for hurting/destroying. It would be only natural for undead to follow suit and be evil, then.

[Nanoblack]

Lets not have this thread devolve into another discussion of whether negative energy is naturally good or evil... As for my preferences on undead? I like to use the basics either as a DM or a Necromancer PC. If I start delving into more advanced types (like shadow or wights) I feel like I'm taking advantage.

Level drain and ability score reductions are frequent occurrences when dealing with these buggers. They can make unprepared rogues feel inadequate. It's really just a pain for everyone...

[randomhero00]

Guys I'm speaking "OOC" out of character, or OOG out of game. I don't care what the game labels them as, I'm curious what you think. Personally I think there is nothing inherently evil in undead (or destruction for that matter). For instance, we need to sometimes destroy old buildings to build new, better safer buildings.

[LOTRfan]

Well, if we go into alignments, this is how I see things: unless stated otherwise, I assume intelligent undead with the "Always Evil" alignment are soulless. They are no longer capable of differentiating between right and wrong, and do whatever they want, when they want.

Incorporeal undead and creatures that are explicitly said to have souls are another story.

Some forms of undead (like Liches and Mohrgs) need to be a certain alignment for them to become such creatures: all liches were Lawful Evil in life, therefore all Liches are Lawful Evil in undeath.

Other creatures, like Mummies, are forever guardians of a certain area. They learn to grudgingly accept this, and develop a lawful attitude. At the same time, they are still bitter at their forced transformation, and this hatred stays until they no longer have qualms for outright killing mortals (evil).

Incorporeal creatures always start out with the alignment they had in life, even if they have a master. Creatures who need to consume something (like Wraiths) tend to lose control and spiral towards base instinct and evil more quickly than the rest. Others, like Allips, are already insane and vengeful. Ghosts and spectres generally have the same alignment they had in life, but as time goes on, they get bored. They are incapable of moving on to the next life, however, and they get bored. They become irritated, and lash at at living creatures around them.

That's just how I explain it, though.

[Drakevarg]

It depends entirely on the fluff of the undead in question. If you went by 3.5 canon, then my opinion on sentient, non-parasitic undead would be "badass, but best viewed from a distance."

On the other hand, I think 3.5 canon can suck on a wand of disintegrate. In my own campaigns, I tend to characterize the non-parasitic undead as being more Lawful Neutral. Beings so devoted to their cause that they're not about to let a little thing like death get in their way. In this case, mummies (for example) are thing to be treated with respect, as they're usually serving the function of tomb wardens... sometimes to keep something less friendly IN as opposed to keeping theives OUT.

[randomhero00]

Well, if we go into alignments, this is how I see things: unless stated otherwise, I assume intelligent undead with the "Always Evil" alignment are soulless. They are no longer capable of differentiating between right and wrong, and do whatever they want, when they want.


You can say the same things about animals though, and they aren't evil. Souls or not, they have no right or wrong, and act on instinct. Which isn't evil.

PS also pretty sure, all sentient undead have souls...they may just not be quite in the same shape as a normal soul (such as split up in phylacteries).

[Psyren]

Guys I'm speaking "OOC" out of character, or OOG out of game. I don't care what the game labels them as, I'm curious what you think. Personally I think there is nothing inherently evil in undead (or destruction for that matter). For instance, we need to sometimes destroy old buildings to build new, better safer buildings.

You can't ask us to view a game concept from a purely OOG perspective. The question then becomes, "if we're not talking about D&D undead, which undead are we talking about?"

D&D undead are unfortunately bastards most of the time; that's just how they were designed. Even the mindless ones simply get hungry/murderous around living creatures.

[randomhero00]

You can't ask us to view a game concept from a purely OOG perspective. The question then becomes, "if we're not talking about D&D undead, which undead are we talking about?"

D&D undead are unfortunately bastards most of the time; that's just how they were designed. Even the mindless ones simply get hungry/murderous around living creatures.

As in, taking a perspective outside of the game. You can still view the same undead however. You just don't have to go by RAW. Get it?

[LOTRfan]

You can say the same things about animals though, and they aren't evil. Souls or not, they have no right or wrong, and act on instinct. Which isn't evil.

Let me rephrase that. Undead are no longer compelled to care about living things, and treat them as vermin, despite having the intelligence to see that these creatures are intelligent, and feel pain. Animals are not smart enough to tell the difference.

That's the difference between a wight ghoul strangling a commoner and a tyrannosaur swallowing a halfling whole.

[Psyren]

As in, taking a perspective outside of the game. You can still view the same undead however. You just don't have to go by RAW. Get it?

So you're asking how I view unstoppable, soulless killing machines from an out-of-game perspective? Knowing that I, not being a D&D character, lack any means of controlling, repelling or otherwise redeeming them?

My answer must then be Kill It With Fire™.

[Ormur]

Without any of the baggage from D&D undead are just revolting to me. There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to live longer, or in this case after your dead. It's only morally objectionable to me if it involved doings some bad stuff to accomplish.

...But they're still yucky. The suicide and reincarnation trick is more hygienic. The act of killing yourself might be pretty gross but at least you'll be properly alive and metabolising after it, not rotting away.

[randomhero00]

So you're asking how I view unstoppable, soulless killing machines from an out-of-game perspective? Knowing that I, not being a D&D character, lack any means of controlling, repelling or otherwise redeeming them?

My answer must then be Kill It With Fire™.

Um what about necropolitans and all the lich variety? They don't have to be evil. Its just RAW that says they are. Many undead end up secluding themselves or going to another plane and ignoring the living altogether. Are they somehow evil?

[Psyren]

Um what about necropolitans and all the lich variety? They don't have to be evil. Its just RAW that says they are. Many undead end up secluding themselves or going to another plane and ignoring the living altogether. Are they somehow evil?

You asked how I viewed standard undead and I told you. If you're now asking how I view non-standard undead, my answer is on a case-by-case basis.

And really, if they're living in seclusion they won't interact with me anyway. How would I get the chance to form an opinion?

[Yuki Akuma]

You can say the same things about animals though, and they aren't evil. Souls or not, they have no right or wrong, and act on instinct. Which isn't evil.

PS also pretty sure, all sentient undead have souls...they may just not be quite in the same shape as a normal soul (such as split up in phylacteries).

Sentient undead have souls - made of negative energy (normal souls are made of positive energy).

If you have an Int score of 2 or lower, you cannot be Evil - unless you're Undead or a Fiendish animal.

I think that speaks volumes, really.

[LOTRfan]

If you have an Int score of 2 or lower, you cannot be Evil - unless you're Undead or a Fiendish animal.

My thinking exactly (except Fiendish animals have an intelligence score of at least 3 :smalltongue:).

[randomhero00]

You asked how I viewed standard undead and I told you. If you're now asking how I view non-standard undead, my answer is on a case-by-case basis.

And really, if they're living in seclusion they won't interact with me anyway. How would I get the chance to form an opinion?

Actually I was pretty specifically asking about non-standard undead, specifically the sentient, non feeding/parasitic ones which have souls. Which are somewhat rare, and therefore non standard.

I'm asking your opinion from an outside perspective. Hence the multiple OOC and OOG comments. Which means you can form an opinion of the undead that live in seclusion.

[absolmorph]

Personally? I hate undead. Vampires, zombies, liches, ghouls, you name it.
Part of it is simply because most predatory undead could pose a threat to humanity, and I happen to feel that I should help my species survive (stupid though some of it's members may be, in my opinion).

In the case of zombies, skeletons and similar non-sentient undead who are controlled by someone, it's their creation that bothers me, as well as the fact that having mindless servants who obey your commands without question is something I, personally, consider a sign of evil.

[randomhero00]

In the case of zombies, skeletons and similar non-sentient undead who are controlled by someone, it's their creation that bothers me, as well as the fact that having mindless servants who obey your commands without question is something I, personally, consider a sign of evil.

So do you consider your relationship with your computer evil?:smallbiggrin:

[absolmorph]

So do you consider your relationship with your computer evil?:smallbiggrin:
Hey, I never said I was entirely Good...
Or Good at all, for that matter.

[LOTRfan]

Actually I was pretty specifically asking about non-standard undead, specifically the sentient, non feeding/parasitic ones which have souls. Which are somewhat rare, and therefore non standard.

Oh, you mean like the brain in a jar, who although not gaining anything from it, mind controls people into doing terrible things?

Or the Plague blights that wish to destroy all that is healthy?

How about my favorite, the Wheeps that go around poisoning creatures? :smallamused:

[kyoryu]

I like undead OOC. In-character, they just say "brains" and "oooOOOooo" a lot. OOC, they're usually really nice and smart. It's also nice gaming with them, since you never have to worry about them snagging the last piece of pizza.

[Psyren]

Actually I was pretty specifically asking about non-standard undead, specifically the sentient, non feeding/parasitic ones which have souls. Which are somewhat rare, and therefore non standard.

No, you said:


You can still view the same undead however.

I took this to mean "D&D Undead," the vast majority of whom are killing machines with very rare and specific exceptions.


I'm asking your opinion from an outside perspective. Hence the multiple OOC and OOG comments. Which means you can form an opinion of the undead that live in seclusion.

My perspective was OOG. I have no way to control them, no way to rebuke/turn them, and no way to restore them to life. I could strap them to a treadmill or something, but that's a recipe for disaster. Better just to destroy them.

The good ones of course, I would leave alone.

[DragonOfUndeath]

I like undead OOC. In-character, they just say "brains" and "oooOOOooo" a lot. OOC, they're usually really nice and smart. It's also nice gaming with them, since you never have to worry about them snagging the last piece of pizza.

or stealing your girlfriend. OOC they are pretty fun to hang with, except when those meddling priests try to exorcise them or banish them :smallfurious:

[Marnath]

OOC? I can't stand the idea of undead. I can't bring myself to play a character that's ok with not destroying undead.

[WinceRind]

I think undead are awesome. Even in broad sense, including stuff like vampires (although I'd never class them with what I'd consider "undead", they seem too different. They're more like a magical parasite, I don't see why they even have to be "dead" in the first place) and mummies (well, it's pretty straightforward here).

The main problem I have with D&D and a good portion of fantasy in general is the whole "negative/positive energy" or equivalents of such. Such bull****, in m y opinion. Alignments are majorly flawed too, but that's a completely different story that's been argued about far too many times.

So, yeah. Undead. They're pretty cool. The sentient ones, at least. I honestly see no reason why there can't be such thing as a benevolent undead (even if it is a horribly human-centric view in the first place. Who said YOUR position was right? Maybe that lich is, in fact, metaphorically speaking, a paladin, battling the horrible scourge that is you. Whoah, trippy.)

The whole "Oh noes, it's negative energy, they're bad!" thing is... meh.

In my honest opinion, a lich's attempt to secure immortality or achieve whatever the hell people want to achieve by becoming a lich aside from immortality and various powers... is no different from one's attempt to vastly improve oneself through awesome cybernetic implants in various sci-fi settings, or any other form of human (or whatever race we're talking about here) transcendence. Hooray for trans-humanism (and -elfism, and -whateverism).

[DragonOfUndeath]

I think undead are awesome. Even in broad sense, including stuff like vampires (although I'd never class them with what I'd consider "undead", they seem too different. They're more like a magical parasite, I don't see why they even have to be "dead" in the first place) and mummies (well, it's pretty straightforward here).

the original vampire myth didn't mention undead. they still needed to breath, sleep, eat (drink blood but i think it counts). they were basically CHA-based casters (beautiful, access to the Dominate spell etc.) that couldn't stand the sun. oh and they could also have little half-vampire things called dyampyer or something like that.

[Mastikator]

Sentient undead have souls - made of negative energy (normal souls are made of positive energy).

If you have an Int score of 2 or lower, you cannot be Evil - unless you're Undead or a Fiendish animal.

I think that speaks volumes, really.

This. In D&D things like "good" and "evil" are tangible things (like, real physical energies and materials that you can sense), and both undead and fiends are beings made of Evil™, literally.

[DragonOfUndeath]

This. In D&D things like "good" and "evil" are tangible things (like, real physical energies and materials that you can sense), and both undead and fiends are beings made of Evil™, literally.

actually while Good and Evil are quantifiable the -plane and +plane doesn't have them. -charged Undead shouldn't be arbitrarily deemed Evil™. in my campaigns (and all my friends) most Undead are either TN (mindless) or extremeLN (follows orders without question).

[Mastikator]

That's cool, I have nothing against houserules and housefluff, but it's not cannon D&D.

Evil and good are actual things that physically exists in all the planes. Don't believe me? Look at the Holy/Unholy/Axiomatic/Anarchic weapons, they deal aligned damage. Good energy that harms evil beings (and vice versa).

[Adamaro]

I think they should all be smitten and in case they un-live, smitten again. Can you even imagine how scary a real undead would by? Your cold, gray, undead grandma standing in a hall ...
Man I'd smite that ... or run away :smallbiggrin:

[DragonOfUndeath]

That's cool, I have nothing against houserules and housefluff, but it's not cannon D&D.

Evil and good are actual things that physically exists in all the planes. Don't believe me? Look at the Holy/Unholy/Axiomatic/Anarchic weapons, they deal aligned damage. Good energy that harms evil beings (and vice versa).

yes Good and Evil are tangible forces but -energy and +energy aren't affected by them. it's like saying Law is Good and Chaos is Evil for some random reason.

[hamishspence]

It depends entirely on the fluff of the undead in question. If you went by 3.5 canon, then my opinion on sentient, non-parasitic undead would be "badass, but best viewed from a distance."

On the other hand, I think 3.5 canon can suck on a wand of disintegrate. In my own campaigns, I tend to characterize the non-parasitic undead as being more Lawful Neutral. Beings so devoted to their cause that they're not about to let a little thing like death get in their way. In this case, mummies (for example) are thing to be treated with respect, as they're usually serving the function of tomb wardens... sometimes to keep something less friendly IN as opposed to keeping theives OUT.

Quite a lot of 3.5 canon allows for nonevil undead.
There's the Good Lich variant in Libris Mortis, the archlich & baelnorn in Monsters of Faerun, and the "any nongood" necropolitan. And the "always chaotic neutral" Curst- also in Monsters of Faerun.

Lords of Darkness also mentions how some undead can behave in a decidedly not-evil manner- skeletons coming to the rescue of a city under siege, paladins coming back as undead to right wrongs, and so on.

So, there's certainly precedent.

[dsmiles]

Quite a lot of 3.5 canon allows for nonevil undead.
There's the Good Lich variant in Libris Mortis, the archlich & baelnorn in Monsters of Faerun, and the "any nongood" necropolitan. And the "always chaotic neutral" Curst- also in Monsters of Faerun.

Lords of Darkness also mentions how some undead can behave in a decidedly not-evil manner- skeletons coming to the rescue of a city under siege, paladins coming back as undead to right wrongs, and so on.

So, there's certainly precedent.

...and Deathless in BoED. (Yay! Positive-energy-fueled undead!)

[hamishspence]

True- I was thinking of the non-deathless, non-evil undead.

That said, I think in previous editions (2nd ed?) there was text saying ordinary mummies were +ve energy-fuelled.

Mustn't forget the Always Neutral revenant in MoF, updated in City of the Spider Queen.

[Kaww]

the original vampire myth didn't mention undead. they still needed to breath, sleep, eat (drink blood but i think it counts). they were basically CHA-based casters (beautiful, access to the Dominate spell etc.) that couldn't stand the sun. oh and they could also have little half-vampire things called dyampyer or something like that.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. Since vampire and the word vampire (vampir) come from my national mythology I have to disagree. Original vampires rise from the dead (poVAMPIRiti). The living vampires, which are mentioned in the myths are somewhat similar to werewolves, as they are described today.

[dsmiles]

True- I was thinking of the non-deathless, non-evil undead.

That said, I think in previous editions (2nd ed?) there was text saying ordinary mummies were +ve energy-fuelled.

Mustn't forget the Always Neutral revenant in MoF, updated in City of the Spider Queen.

Revenants are awesome. Curst are "usually chaotic neutral," IIRC.

[hamishspence]

Ah, I thought they were "always chaotic neutral" in either MoF or Lost Empires of Faerun (where they are reprinted).

Mustn't forget one of the undead most variable in alignment, typically least hideous- and often, hardest to destroy permanently...

The Ghost.

That said, they were mentioned in the third post:


Seriously, in Core, there are *two* undead that do not include both "Always" and "Evil" in their alignment description. The Mummy is "Usually" Evil, while the Ghost is "Any". There's... what, 18 different undead in Core?

[Yuki Akuma]

...and Deathless in BoED. (Yay! Positive-energy-fueled undead!)

Deathless aren't Undead.

[Mastikator]

yes Good and Evil are tangible forces but -energy and +energy aren't affected by them. it's like saying Law is Good and Chaos is Evil for some random reason.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying all negative energy based "life"forms are evil, and obviously not all positive based are good.
But undead (and fiends) are made of more than just positive and negative energy (fiends are positive based, btw). They're also made out of regular matter, and they are made out of the substance of Evil. Fiends and undead radiate evil like nothing else (you can check with Detect Evil).

[dsmiles]

Deathless aren't Undead.

You say potato, I say fibrous tuber. :smallwink:

[Aotrs Commander]

We are, of course, inherently awesome (especially Liches) and you should totally all bow down before us, fleshies, and beg for the guidance, leadership and wisdom of the superior being. We know better because we are better.



Well, except for Vampires, obviously, as they are single lowest form of anything existant in the multiverse (with the only exceptions of the Shi'Ar and Gladiator) and should be unilaterally destroyed, regardless of alignment, powers or any other concerns, in as painful a way as possible.. One should always remember than in the end, a vampire is basically just a pathetically emo leech in a dinner suit; and that's being rather unfair to leeches. Which, unlike Vampires, actually have a use.

[dsmiles]

Well, except for Vampires, obviously, as they are single lowest form of anything existant in the multiverse

Only the emo ones and the sparkly ones. The original Nosferatu (1922, IIRC) was pretty awesome.

[Psyren]

Deathless aren't Undead.You say potato, I say fibrous tuber. :smallwink:

VERY tempted to sig this exchange :smallbiggrin:

[Aotrs Commander]

Only the emo ones and the sparkly ones. The original Nosferatu (1922, IIRC) was pretty awesome.

No, I really do mean ALL of them.

Every.

Single.

One.

The Twilight vampires don't even register on my HateOMeter, they barely qualify as even Vampires, they're so pathetic. I have hated Vampires long, long before it became cool.

Yes, even Angel. Yes, even Spike. And Strahd, and Dracula and any other Vampire you can mention.

And, yes, even, to my great personal tragedy, even...*wince* Jubilee, my most favourite X-Man and arguably favourite character ever; until such time she becomes un-Vampirified. (And if she doesn't, I will hunt down Joe Quesada and do unspeakable thing to his soul's internal organs, and Aotrs regulations be damned!)

My hatred of Vampires burns colder and stronger than the black-cold depths of the darkest and most entropic places of the Negative Energy Plane.

[hamishspence]

But undead (and fiends) are made of more than just positive and negative energy (fiends are positive based, btw). They're also made out of regular matter, and they are made out of the substance of Evil. Fiends and undead radiate evil like nothing else (you can check with Detect Evil).

They can still be nonevil in alignment though- the MM points out that a being with a Good alignment and an Evil subtype will count as both. It will take a negative level if it picks up either a holy or unholy weapon.

[dsmiles]

VERY tempted to sig this exchange :smallbiggrin:

I honestly wasn't going for humor. No, really. It's just kind of hard to spell and alternate pronunciation of a word when they're spelled exactly the same, you know? But looking back on it, it was kind of funny.

[Psyren]

I honestly wasn't going for humor. No, really. It's just kind of hard to spell and alternate pronunciation of a word when they're spelled exactly the same, you know? But looking back on it, it was kind of funny.

It was more the silly pedantry along the lines of "nuh-uh, don't you dare get your fictional nonliving creature type mixed up with MY fictional nonliving creature type!" :smallwink: Especially after you had taken the time to specify the major difference between them for this thread's purpose i.e. the positive energy source.

A lot of people would have gotten annoyed at being called on the technicality, but you took it in stride is all :smallsmile:

[Yuki Akuma]

No, the important distinction is that Deathless are not Undead, so using them as examples is silly. :smalltongue:

Unless you use mushrooms es examples of plants? They grow in the ground, they're obviously the same!

[hamishspence]

In D&D, the Plant type normally includes Fungus monsters:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/fungus.htm

Given that in older editions, mummies were positive energy undead, the difference does look a little small.

[Psyren]

No, the important distinction is that Deathless are not Undead, so using them as examples is silly. :smalltongue:

Unless you use mushrooms es examples of plants? They grow in the ground, they're obviously the same!

See? Nonstop fun! :smallbiggrin:


In D&D, the Plant type normally includes Fungus monsters:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/fungus.htm

Given that in older editions, mummies were positive energy undead, the difference does look a little small.

Hey, we're trying to make a point here :smalltongue: (I don't recall what that point IS, but still!)

[Coidzor]

Evil and good are actual things that physically exists in all the planes. Don't believe me? Look at the Holy/Unholy/Axiomatic/Anarchic weapons, they deal aligned damage. Good energy that harms evil beings (and vice versa).

Unholy weapons don't heal undead and holy weapons don't heal living creatures.

So, these two types of weapons have nothing to do with positive or negative energy damage.

[Starsign]

Quite a lot of 3.5 canon allows for nonevil undead.
There's the Good Lich variant in Libris Mortis, the archlich & baelnorn in Monsters of Faerun, and the "any nongood" necropolitan. And the "always chaotic neutral" Curst- also in Monsters of Faerun.

Lords of Darkness also mentions how some undead can behave in a decidedly not-evil manner- skeletons coming to the rescue of a city under siege, paladins coming back as undead to right wrongs, and so on.

So, there's certainly precedent.


With a handful of exceptions, even the non-feeding undead are Evil. Seriously, in Core, there are *two* undead that do not include both "Always" and "Evil" in their alignment description. The Mummy is "Usually" Evil, while the Ghost is "Any". There's... what, 18 different undead in Core?
I am in agreement with these statements. I personally play undead characters sometimes (just look at my avatar :smalltongue:) and often stick them with a Neutral alignment (meaning any alignment with Neutral in it's name, aside from Neutral Evil). I don't like my undead being naturally evil, and sometimes it's difficult to RP a good-aligned undead (though anyone can prove me wrong if they'd like), so I usually prefer Neutral alignments. Granted some settings (like Planescape) are much more undead-friendly then, say Forgotten Realms.

[hamishspence]

Granted some settings (like Planescape) are much more undead-friendly then, say Forgotten Realms.

While Planescape is probably friendlier in the sense that an undead can walk down the street and not get lynched by paladins, Forgotten Realms actually has a lot more examples of kinds of undead that are not always evil.

[Mastikator]

They can still be nonevil in alignment though- the MM points out that a being with a Good alignment and an Evil subtype will count as both. It will take a negative level if it picks up either a holy or unholy weapon.
What's the difference between "Alignment: Always Evil" and "creature type [Evil]"?
Either alignment is something physical and tangible and at the same time there's this thing called alignment which is a different thing, but with the same name, correlates based on name and purely philosophical. Or alignment is something that any creature can have mix of, you can be both good and evil.
Both options are logically inconsistent and only makes things confusing.


Unholy weapons don't heal undead and holy weapons don't heal living creatures.

So, these two types of weapons have nothing to do with positive or negative energy damage.
I already said that I don't mean negative energy when I say evil energy, I mean evil energy. Which is different in the same way that healing and smite evil is different.

[hamishspence]

What's the difference between "Alignment: Always Evil" and "creature type [Evil]"?
Either alignment is something physical and tangible and at the same time there's this thing called alignment which is a different thing, but with the same name, correlates based on name and purely philosophical. Or alignment is something that any creature can have mix of, you can be both good and evil.

Creature subtype [Evil] means that the creature is imbued with evil energies- and thus will ping on somebody's Detect Evil.

So, for that matter, is "being a cleric of an evil god".

A LN cleric of an LE god, will Detect as Evil- despite not actually being evil.

PHB states "Alignment is general moral and personal attitudes".

Therefore, if a being of [Evil] subtype changes its moral and personal attitudes, it may change alignment as well.

[Starsign]

While Planescape is probably friendlier in the sense that an undead can walk down the street and not get lynched by paladins, Forgotten Realms actually has a lot more examples of kinds of undead that are not always evil.
Huh, I didn't really know that really, Bulder's Gate 1 and 2 didn't seem to care about non-evil undead sadly. I should actually play a Planescape game sometime really. :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

Sigil is about the most cosmopolitan city around- there, devils and angels argue on street corners and no-one bats an eyelid.

In 4E, Open Grave lists Sigil as one of the most undead-friendly cities- they have the same protections under the law as living people there.

[Telonius]

I'm actually kind of struggling to come up with what a non-parasitic intelligent undead would do. Something like a Bodak or a Lich or a Vampire, it's easy to figure out. But unless the undead in question have some reason for being there, what's the point? Ghosts haunt, Deathless advise. But if we're just talking about undead as a regular alternate afterlife path, what do they do? Just sit out in the wilderness contemplating their decomposition, and hoping that no adventurers show up?

[hamishspence]

Adventure, possibly? Pursue the same sort of goals as they did in life- only more relentlessly and without having to do things like eat or sleep?

[dsmiles]

Adventure, possibly? Pursue the same sort of goals as they did in life- only more relentlessly and without having to do things like eat or sleep?

w00t! Emancipated Spawn!!

[WinceRind]

I'm actually kind of struggling to come up with what a non-parasitic intelligent undead would do. Something like a Bodak or a Lich or a Vampire, it's easy to figure out. But unless the undead in question have some reason for being there, what's the point? Ghosts haunt, Deathless advise. But if we're just talking about undead as a regular alternate afterlife path, what do they do? Just sit out in the wilderness contemplating their decomposition, and hoping that no adventurers show up?
As opposed to most "normal" forms of afterlife which generally include going to some plane and sitting it out? Or doing something that seems fun but after a million years will be brain-numbingly boring? I'm thinking Ysgard, or whatever plane is supposed to be inspired by Valhalla.

A lich could be a wizard who's always been researching spells, his entire life, and always felt that he is running out of time. So he turned into a lich, and has been sitting with his nose in a book for a few millenia now.

Same might be the case for vampires. Or, you know, they could just be "living" the (un)life of an adventurer. I mean, if you can accept a barbarian as an adventurer, why not a vampire? At least the latter will be less of an illiterate pig =p

[dsmiles]

As opposed to most "normal" forms of afterlife which generally include going to some plane and sitting it out? Or doing something that seems fun but after a million years will be brain-numbingly boring? I'm thinking Ysgard, or whatever plane is supposed to be inspired by Valhalla.

A lich could be a wizard who's always been researching spells, his entire life, and always felt that he is running out of time. So he turned into a lich, and has been sitting with his nose in a book for a few millenia now.

Same might be the case for vampires. Or, you know, they could just be "living" the (un)life of an adventurer. I mean, if you can accept a barbarian as an adventurer, why not a vampire? At least the latter will be less of an illiterate pig =p

Unlife in the Fast Lane

[Psyren]

I'm actually kind of struggling to come up with what a non-parasitic intelligent undead would do. Something like a Bodak or a Lich or a Vampire, it's easy to figure out. But unless the undead in question have some reason for being there, what's the point? Ghosts haunt, Deathless advise. But if we're just talking about undead as a regular alternate afterlife path, what do they do? Just sit out in the wilderness contemplating their decomposition, and hoping that no adventurers show up?

I had a concept for a Warlock Lich once - he pursued undeath (and succeeded thanks to the Magical Training feat) so that he could spend eternity crafting progressively more intricate magic items.

[Coidzor]

As opposed to most "normal" forms of afterlife which generally include going to some plane and sitting it out? Or doing something that seems fun but after a million years will be brain-numbingly boring? I'm thinking Ysgard, or whatever plane is supposed to be inspired by Valhalla.
Actually, that's probably the one kindness of the mental castration that comes with being a petitioner... You don't remember who you were or realize the passage of time so it can't get boring or monotonous despite the fact that it really, really should be.

Telonius: Truly master the arts, maybe? That'd be good for a few centuries before something hit the fan. Though more scholarly inclined personalities would probably just get lost in Boccob's library and mistaken for random statues...

In addition to ye olde standard adventure for ever thing.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

My view is that Undead Are People TooTM. Living things are animated by positive energy, undead are animated by negative energy, golems are animated by elemental energies, automata are animated by shadow energies...hating the undead is simply positive-energy-centric prejudice.

What we should really be concerned about is constructs--undead are just soul-less bodies being used while the soul is off being happy in its afterlife of choice, or fully-sapient alternatively-animated souls, but constructs bind elemental spirits to them in a life of imprisonment and servitude to the construct's master. Say yes to zombies! Say no to flesh golems!

[Coidzor]

My view is that Undead Are People TooTM. Living things are animated by positive energy, undead are animated by negative energy, golems are animated by elemental energies, automata are animated by shadow energies...hating the undead is simply positive-energy-centric prejudice.

What we should really be concerned about is constructs--undead are just soul-less bodies being used while the soul is off being happy in its afterlife of choice, or fully-sapient alternatively-animated souls, but constructs bind elemental spirits to them in a life of imprisonment and servitude to the construct's master. Say yes to zombies! Say no to flesh golems!

I'm inclined to agree. And buy into the image of skeletons and zombies as operating like very basic and very stupid programmable platforms.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

I'm inclined to agree. And buy into the image of skeletons and zombies as operating like very basic and very stupid programmable platforms.

Sort of like a program-your-own-microprocessor kit from Radio Shack. "For a limited time only from Vecna's Temple, the My First Walking Corpse kit, complete with programmer's reference! Only 20 gp!"

[Yuki Akuma]

Only 20gp? Now that is one cheap zombie.

[Coidzor]

Only 20gp? Now that is one cheap zombie.

4/5 of a HD, too. From some creature with 2/5 naturally. Though that would be at cost... so... really any kind of fractional HD creature of below 1/2 HD, so... a juvenile monkey? Or a cat...

Would be appropriately sized for a budding necromancers' first real project/toy...

[Psyren]

4/5 of a HD, too. From some creature with 2/5 naturally. Though that would be at cost... so... really any kind of fractional HD creature of below 1/2 HD, so... a juvenile monkey? Or a cat...

Would be appropriately sized for a budding necromancers' first real project/toy...

"C'mon Barky! Lets find more birds!"
"Woof."

[Coidzor]

"C'mon Barky! Lets find more birds!"
"Woof."

This probably makes me a horrible person, but I'd... I'd get one. Probably would go with a skeleton and add some padding/caps to the pointier bits.

Hmm, a land where undead AI has had enough of a breakthrough that animal intelligence is allowed, so one can handle animal skellington and zomblebee pets... And of course, a workforce of essentially trained ape skeletons that can be pushed to the level of complete puppeteering.

Rawsome.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Only 20gp? Now that is one cheap zombie.

The deal is for a limited time only. A small creature sized for children's hands, an affordable family-friendly price...better get it now, 'cause it doesn't get any better than this!

[dsmiles]

This probably makes me a horrible person, but I'd... I'd get one. Probably would go with a skeleton and add some padding/caps to the pointier bits.

Hmm, a land where undead AI has had enough of a breakthrough that animal intelligence is allowed, so one can handle animal skellington and zomblebee pets... And of course, a workforce of essentially trained ape skeletons that can be pushed to the level of complete puppeteering.

Rawsome.

Dear lord! What have we become? (Rhetorical question, please don't answer that. :smalltongue:)

[mucat]

Guys I'm speaking "OOC" out of character, or OOG out of game. I don't care what the game labels them as, I'm curious what you think. Personally I think there is nothing inherently evil in undead (or destruction for that matter). For instance, we need to sometimes destroy old buildings to build new, better safer buildings.

Out of game, undead don't exist; I don't have any thoughts about them.

If they did exist...well, I'd have to know more about them before passing judgment. Are they mindless or sapient? Free-willed or slaves of their creator? Do the undead themselves find their state inherently painful and miserable, or are they all right with it?

If there were sapient, free-willed undead who respected the rights of other beings, then I suppose I would have no problem with them. People are people, even when they're kind of not.

[dsmiles]

Out of game, undead don't exist; I don't have any thoughts about them.

Obviously, you are not prepared for the impending Zombie Apocalypse. :smalltongue:

[Yuki Akuma]

Out of game, undead don't exist; I don't have any thoughts about them.

That depends on your definition of 'undead'. Does it include "parasites that animate corpses", like in zombie movies?

Because those totally exist.

[DragonOfUndeath]

Obviously, you are not prepared for the impending Zombie Apocalypse. :smalltongue:

hey they prefer Life Challenged no Zombies. they will sue you if you don't cease and desist :smallbiggrin:

im prepared for the zombie apocalypse. i would get my skeleton pals and a gun. all done :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

Ah, if only zombies were so simple to deal with as getting an awakened skeleton bard. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAgSWR8u-v8)

[ScionoftheVoid]

My view is that Undead Are People TooTM. Living things are animated by positive energy, undead are animated by negative energy, golems are animated by elemental energies, automata are animated by shadow energies...hating the undead is simply positive-energy-centric prejudice.

What we should really be concerned about is constructs--undead are just soul-less bodies being used while the soul is off being happy in its afterlife of choice, or fully-sapient alternatively-animated souls, but constructs bind elemental spirits to them in a life of imprisonment and servitude to the construct's master. Say yes to zombies! Say no to flesh golems!


This probably makes me a horrible person, but I'd... I'd get one. Probably would go with a skeleton and add some padding/caps to the pointier bits.

Hmm, a land where undead AI has had enough of a breakthrough that animal intelligence is allowed, so one can handle animal skellington and zomblebee pets... And of course, a workforce of essentially trained ape skeletons that can be pushed to the level of complete puppeteering.

Rawsome.

I agree with these people. Life causes suffering, hunger, pain, grief and many other things we would be better off without, undead cut out two of those four and many other things which are annoying if not as bad (having to breathe and sleep, for example). Actual death removes all of these things.

As an aside, I sympathise with Seymour in FFX, the heroes may well get rid of the world-shaking killbomination but they can't remove suffering from the world. Seymour can, why don't they listen to him?!

Also, zomblebees have got to be the coolest things ever, just based on their name. Add the fact that they will endlessly produce honey without being agressive toward their creator and you have the perfect creature! All you need is a once/day automated Gentle Repose. I now have some new NPCs to use in my campaign. Bwa-hah-hah-haa!

[0Megabyte]

If undead were real:

Well, preparations for the zombie apocalypse are kind of important. You don't want to be caught with your pants down when Uncle Joe comes back to life and tries to eat you, hmm?

What a pity the house I live in now is essentially impossible to secure. I'd prefer one of those houses they use near New Orleans on the beach, where most of the house is high above. After all, zombies are a kind of flood too...

[Optimator]

Undead are twisted abominations that serve no purpose other than to mock the natural order of things. That or plow fields.

[DragonOfUndeath]

Undead are twisted abominations that serve no purpose other than to mock the natural order of things. That or plow fields.

the natural order of things? for Undead to be possible the natural order must allow it. how is something a mockery of the very thing that created it? it's like saying Homo Sapien Sapien (Us) are mockeries of Homo Sapiens (our distant ancestors)

[Starsign]

Y'know, we should play a D&D game with undead characters, and, in addition to combat, we explore the things about undead that separates them from living people and constructs, while having the game keep a positive message (not positive energy :smalltongue:) What does everyone think?

[druid91]

Some forms of undead (like Liches and Mohrgs) need to be a certain alignment for them to become such creatures: all liches were Lawful Evil in life, therefore all Liches are Lawful Evil in undeath.

There are good Liches you know.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Y'know, we should play a D&D game with undead characters, and, in addition to combat, we explore the things about undead that separates them from living people and constructs, while having the game keep a positive message (not positive energy :smalltongue:) What does everyone think?

I'd play in that.

[Starsign]

I'd play in that.
Hey, if you're interested. Do you wanna start a recruitment thread? We could play on Skype if you have it.

[DragonOfUndeath]

i'd play it too. homebrew Undead or standard Monster PC rules?

[Starsign]

i'd play it too. homebrew Undead or standard Monster PC rules?
Well I'd think I'd leave that up to the DM. The monster classes do seem well done for the most part, but there are some races and templates that they haven't done yet (I personally use the Gravetouched Ghoul template from Libris Mortis).

I'll get a thread started. :smallwink:

[Starsign]

Thread is up, anyone interested in entering may do so here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=175388)