PDA

View Full Version : Undead Labor: why not? [D&D, but also fantasy in general]



Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 07:55 AM
Assuming a society does not regard necromancy as inherently evil, and undead labor is fairly affordable, why wouldn't most people that need long term muscle-power decide to invest in a skeleton or zombie?

They don't tire. They don't complain. They never require fuel of any sort. Really, the only nuisance (in my mind) is that some types of undead will rot over time, and this may take a quite a while (depending on interpretations, of course).

Oh wait...there's the question of intelligence. How intelligent does manual labor need to be?

Czin
2011-01-25, 07:57 AM
Assuming a society does not regard necromancy as inherently evil, and undead labor is fairly affordable, why wouldn't most people that need long term muscle-power decide to invest in a skeleton or zombie?

They don't tire. They don't complain. They never require fuel of any sort. Really, the only nuisance (in my mind) is that some types of undead will rot over time, and this may take a quite a while (depending on interpretations, of course).

Oh wait...there's the question of intelligence. How intelligent does manual labor need to be?

The Draconimicon mentions a Blue Dragon who makes heavy usage of undead labor in his salt mines, but it also mentions that the Blue dragon finds that the Undead labor works far more slowly than living slave labor.

Eldan
2011-01-25, 07:58 AM
The required intelligence would in large parts depend on the actual task. I'd assume that a zombie would be able to "dig", but it wouldn't recognize where to dig, for how long, or how deep.

The morality question depends, I'd assume, on how the undead are created. If just the body is animated, but the spirit left in peace, I wouldn't see it as evil, and it should be doable without morality issues. That is, IIRC, how the Dustmen do it. Of course their undead are more treated like constructs which seem to need constant repairs (bolts in the joints, careful embalming, bandages and so on).

If, however, you are basically binding a tortured spirit to it's dead flesh, you are committing major atrocities.

Malachei
2011-01-25, 08:33 AM
Possible issues:


Other societies crusade against the undead-creators: Unless the society has already conquered the fantasy setting, the other nations will unite, with special fervor, because, after battles, the undead-creator nation tends to animate not only their own, but also their enemies' fallen.
The abused souls return as undead spirits, hunting their tormentors: whatever the undead-creators do, a common concensus of roleplaying settings is the good/evil conflict and the framework of natural death and afterlife. D&D and most other settings define a soul, and state that undead existence is unnatural and painful. Thus, with a society depending on a large number of undead, it will probably be affected by a large number of vengeful spirits, as well.
The gods punish the society: in order to work, the society will probably need an ethical framework that either does not value afterlife at all, or declares a full separation of body and soul. Either way, the actual gods may be not amused.

Jack_Simth
2011-01-25, 08:34 AM
The required intelligence would in large parts depend on the actual task. I'd assume that a zombie would be able to "dig", but it wouldn't recognize where to dig, for how long, or how deep.

The morality question depends, I'd assume, on how the undead are created. If just the body is animated, but the spirit left in peace, I wouldn't see it as evil, and it should be doable without morality issues. That is, IIRC, how the Dustmen do it. Of course their undead are more treated like constructs which seem to need constant repairs (bolts in the joints, careful embalming, bandages and so on).

If, however, you are basically binding a tortured spirit to it's dead flesh, you are committing major atrocities.
Yes - for questions of morality and ethics, the how is a very important bit. There's a very big difference between the husband and wife who agreed in advance to play out a particular scenario for quirky fun, and one random stranger forcing themselves on another person - even though both scenarios might be exactly the same on the surface for the event itself.

Unfortunately, the how is left out of the rules.

There's some quirky bits in the rules that support the 'tortured spirit' interpretation, although they're not fully consistent, and they're not explicit. For instance, Resurrection (and even True Resurrection which needs nothing of the corpse) fails if the corpse is still walking around somewhere. Destroying the undead first will let it work, as will applying the spell directly to the active undead. Both of which support the 'prison of rotting flesh' bit, even though they're not conclusive.

Malachei
2011-01-25, 09:51 AM
If just the body is animated, but the spirit left in peace, I wouldn't see it as evil


some quirky bits in the rules that support the 'tortured spirit' interpretation

Most prominently, Animate Dead and its cousins from the school of Necromancy feature the [Evil] descriptor.

Apart from D&D RAW, I prefer my games to be on the good side. It is a better motivator, IMO, and makes for more interesting campaigns. The only evil campaign we've ever played lost its thrill rather quickly. But such a society can be a great antagonist.

By the way, there's a nice 1st edition module, Egg of the Phoenix, which featured undead labor, disguised by illusions.

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 10:12 AM
Most prominently, Animate Dead and its cousins from the school of Necromancy feature the [Evil] descriptor. Which isn't much of a moral justification because, well, the rules are quirky and inconsistent.

And it boils down to evil is evil because it's evil because I said so.

estradling
2011-01-25, 10:27 AM
The issues of how confusing and contradictory necromancy is in 3.5 is covered best I think by the Tome of Necromancy.

However the OP is questioning after the morality is dealt with why not use undead labor? My thought is once morality is dealt with then you are dealing with the Fantasy versions of Robots. So answers might be better found in those kinda of sources.

First one I see in who controls them. Generally they will only take orders from one person. It can be changed but you probably don't want to do it often for risk of losing control. But at the same time it is quite possible for someone to 'hack' your undead and take them away from you

If the owner is the one in control then he has to personally give the orders. If the undead can handle complex orders, it might be doable but it they are more of a single task do <until new orders> loop machine then they have to be constantly supervised. This might be doable on smaller farms and what not but the larger you go the more supervisors (and therefore controllers) you will need.

Then there is the initial cost of creating your undead robot. 25 gp per hitdice. Then compare that to the cost of a laborer. An undead is going to have to work a long time to be more cost effective.

Then there is the social issues... How are the displaced workers going to respond to being replaced by a soulless machine that has no family to feed? How are the rulers going to feel about having a large chunck of people while at the same having quite a few other groups being able to field small (if ill equipped) armies or brute squads on a moments notice?

Grumman
2011-01-25, 10:32 AM
Which isn't much of a moral justification because, well, the rules are quirky and inconsistent.

And it boils down to evil is evil because it's evil because I said so.
No, it doesn't. For starters, just look at the rules for True Resurrection. You can resurrect someone whose body has been completely annihilated, but not someone whose corpse has been animated as a zombie. If True Resurrection can completely ignore anything done to your body up to and including complete annihilation, a spell that hinders it must have effects on you beyond just your corpse: in other words, on your soul.

And that's ignoring the idea that an undead is like an unshielded nuclear reactor of entropic magic.

The Rose Dragon
2011-01-25, 10:33 AM
Depends on the undead. Even if undead are not regarded as inherently evil, there are a variety of undead types, which may or may not be suitable to manual labor.

For an in-depth examination of different types of zombies and their place in society, I suggest getting the various All Flesh Must Be Eaten books.

Jair Barik
2011-01-25, 10:34 AM
The dustmen do indeed use such labour (generally though it requires the person to have signed over their body for money prior to death).

Of course the dustmen philosophy supports this idea to some degree but at the same time I recall they differentiate between free willed dead and dead without a soul (think this relates to a pact they have of non aggression with the undead) with intelligent undead being semi-abhorrent to them due their inability to pass on into the true death.

Eldan
2011-01-25, 10:37 AM
First one I see in who controls them. Generally they will only take orders from one person. It can be changed but you probably don't want to do it often for risk of losing control. But at the same time it is quite possible for someone to 'hack' your undead and take them away from you


This could be solved by homebrewing an item, perhaps: have a scepter, crown, ring etc. and hand it over to a new overseer every shift. Can be stonlen, of course.


Then there is the initial cost of creating your undead robot. 25 gp per hitdice. Then compare that to the cost of a laborer. An undead is going to have to work a long time to be more cost effective.


You could make items that cast Animate Dead. At will is probably overkill, but 5/day should be quite sufficient. Those are still expensive, but in a large society, I could see it.

Now, as for the social issues: perhaps this society has been depopulated somehow, in a way that left them without workers, but with a lot of corpses (and enough mages to do this, which is another issue).
An example for this could be Karrnath: they use their undead as soldiers. But if there's a plague, I could see a society turning desperate enough to use zombie farmhands and especially corpse cart drivers and grave diggers (they can't get infected).


The dustmen do indeed use such labour (generally though it requires the person to have signed over their body for money prior to death).

Of course the dustmen philosophy supports this idea to some degree but at the same time I recall they differentiate between free willed dead and dead without a soul (think this relates to a pact they have of non aggression with the undead) with intelligent undead being semi-abhorrent to them due their inability to pass on into the true death.

Interestingly, while they might dislike undead due to philosophical issues (the soul is basically stuck), they also have intelligent undead takign up a large part of their highest ranks.

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 10:38 AM
^: Tome of Necromancy link. (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19527634/Tome_of_Necromancy)

I'm thinking 1. Cost of creation, it costs 50 gp to make a civilized humanoid into a zombie, 25 gp for a skeleton. More larger and stronger bodies having a higher cost of animation as do those with special abilities that would be useful, like flight (and they'd have to be zombies which is a flat doubling of the baseline animation cost...)

2. Overseers. Undead need to be controlled and directed. People capable of controlling them intrinsically, like rebuking clerics, might not be as common as desired or able to effect as many undead as would be necessary or simply may not be free to be part of the human capital for the job, being tied to temples/adventuring. Cost figures in here as well if magic items are devised to allow individuals to direct construction undead. Also, while the undead do not tire, their overseers likely will and they need adequate lighting by which to see to direct their workers properly and spot any hazards before they can cause a disruption. So being able to work around the clock doesn't mean they'll be able to be effectively used around the clock.

3. Economics. What does one do with the working class when construction is being done by the undead? Are they going to rise up like the luddites of England and try to smash up as many undead as they can to drive costs up and prevent their feasible use?


No, it doesn't. For starters, just look at the rules for True Resurrection. You can resurrect someone whose body has been completely annihilated, but not someone whose corpse has been animated as a zombie. If True Resurrection can completely ignore anything done to your body up to and including complete annihilation, a spell that hinders it must have effects on you beyond just your corpse: in other words, on your soul.

Doesn't actually say that the soul is being tortured or truly inconvenienced. Hence, quirky and inconsistent. All interpretations to this point are pretty much just houserules.


And that's ignoring the idea that an undead is like an unshielded nuclear reactor of entropic magic.

And the idea that an undead is like an unshielded nuclear reactor of entropic magic is... again, unsupported by the rules and something that you yourself came up with.

Otherwise, point it out where the rules state that undead make everything worse just by existing.

Malachei
2011-01-25, 10:40 AM
Which isn't much of a moral justification because, well, the rules are quirky and inconsistent.

And it boils down to evil is evil because it's evil because I said so.


It is evil because it is designated as [Evil].

I don't see much ambiguity in that.

Of course, the game does not cover the philosophical aspects of morality -- and it is not intended to do.

Most people would probably not want to invest the time to be able to discuss the subject on a level adequate to moral philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality). It is a game, after all.

Thus, the RAW can be as simple as designating an act as [evil].

However, it may be very interesting to include ethical ambiguity in the game's roleplaying (fluff) part: For instance, the undead-creating nation might actually have a very different opinion on their behavior, possibly pointing out the better quality of life and welfare they can afford for their members.

In fact, IMO, most societies would not describe themselves as evil -- would your average orc tribe say they are evil, or part of an evil society?

Lapak
2011-01-25, 10:41 AM
I'd say lack of intelligence is the big reasons. People underrate how much skill is involved in manual labor because almost anyone can learn it with practice, but there's a world of difference between a farmhand or a miner who has been doing it for ten years and an unskilled white-collar volunteer who shows up to help harvest. The experienced laborer will get ten times the work done in the same time, and get it done better.

Non-intelligent undead laborers would be like working with all unskilled volunteers who never learn and need constant, detailed supervision. And as estradling pointed out, your overseers are going to be quite skilled and thus very expensive.

It's almost always going to be cheaper to use people who can learn how to do a task and then just do it, unless there is some drastic shortage of people for one reason or another.

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 10:44 AM
It is evil because it is designated as [Evil].

I don't see much ambiguity in that.

But you're still missing the point. Without some idea of what about it is evil it's just arbitrary. Most other evil spells are more clear as they generally cause quite unpleasant things to happen (but, again, many of them don't quite stand up to being burned to death). [edit: also with notable exceptions such as Deathwatch (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/deathwatch.htm)which is hilariously featured on some Exalted spell lists. Compare with enervation (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/enervation.htm)...which is not labeled as evil...]

Hell, describing the soul as being tormented by the spell is the sort of thing D&D fluff writers would get off on, and yet they didn't.

Where here, the justifications are all being provided by players who are filling in the blanks with house rules. And, whether you like it or not, there's plenty of people who see it as inadequately justified and don't want to do the dev's jobs for them by treating houserules as RAW canon.

Blynkibrax
2011-01-25, 10:46 AM
Personally, I always think one of the most consistently overlooked areas of this debate is the question of hygiene. Would you want, say, your food prepared by someone who's rotting, stinks to high heaven, infested with worms, maggots and other bacteria, probably a little bit on the 'drippy' side? :smalleek:

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 10:49 AM
Personally, I always think one of the most consistently overlooked areas of this debate is the question of hygiene. Would you want, say, your food prepared by someone who's rotting, stinks to high heaven, infested with worms, maggots and other bacteria, probably a little bit on the 'drippy' side? :smalleek:

Well, for starters, that's really not what's being meant by labor here. It's mostly meaning manual, unskilled labor rather than the skilled labor that fine motor skills tasks, crafts, and cooking would require.

For another, I don't really think that's a very reasonable interpretation of the abilities of mindless undead, and if they're intelligent undead, then aside from the obviously disqualified such as ghasts, things like necropolitans would do just fine.

BossMuro
2011-01-25, 10:53 AM
As far as the supervision costs go, I don't see how it would be a problem whipping up some cheap magic item that would let a cleric transfer control of undead over to you. Or you could just have the owner say "do what that guy says." One overseer for every 5-10 zombies would probably work out well enough.

Like everyone else is saying, it would take a certain kind of society to do this: relatively low population, a lot of clerics, and probably some kind of work considered dangerous/unpleasant/dishonorable enough that they wouldn't want people doing it, but that's just details.

estradling
2011-01-25, 11:00 AM
This could be solved by homebrewing an item, perhaps: have a scepter, crown, ring etc. and hand it over to a new overseer every shift. Can be stonlen, of course.


You could make items that cast Animate Dead. At will is probably overkill, but 5/day should be quite sufficient. Those are still expensive, but in a large society, I could see it.

Crafting anything puts the cost into the thousands of gold easily... Which means in order to break even you are talking thousands of undead to replace thousands of workers... Large society could do it, but would they? Would they really think it wise to force a large number of their people to have nothing better to do then sit around and complain? You are looking at riots and discontented masses in this case. (unless you find something else for them or have some kind of weird manpower shortage)

Malachei
2011-01-25, 11:06 AM
But you're still missing the point. Without some idea of what about it is evil it's just arbitrary. Most other evil spells are more clear as they generally cause quite unpleasant things to happen (but, again, many of them don't quite stand up to being burned to death).

Hell, describing the soul as being tormented by the spell is the sort of thing D&D fluff writers would get off on, and yet they didn't.

Where here, the justifications are all being provided by players who are filling in the blanks with house rules. And, whether you like it or not, there's plenty of people who see it as inadequately justified.

Actually, I am not missing the point. Btw, do you like it when someone starts their post with "But you're still missing the point?" What is likely to be your next thought? What does it tell you about the writer?

Regarding the issue:

The idea that unpleasant = evil, is, excuse me, not adequate to a philosophical discussion. It is far more complicated than that. And, IMO, it is not the task of the game to define "evil" and "good" (and the boundaries and trade-offs they come with) beyond some very basic level. This is something non-trivial that philosophers have argued on for many years, and still do. So there's no need to say it is quirky and that there is something missing in the game -- the game is quirky in a lot of other areas where game designers have a lot more expertise than ethics.

Now imagine 14-year-old roleplayers referencing the monster manual's morality section in class in a discussion on moral values -- I doubt this will do much good for our hobby.

I do think, however, that the idea of good and evil is inherently included in roleplaying games, and that the game can teach us a lot of very important things. But that does not refer to the crunch, but the fluff part of the game. I believe the game designers already have enough discussions over alignment and when the paladin loses his class abilities. The game designers might have a relative understanding (like saying a fireball is not evil, but burning a defenseless person is; and saying that some spells are inherently evil, because they stop a killed person's soul from journeying to the upper planes and begin afterlife), but they know why they are not telling us exactly in RAW: because it is not an easy task and something that is not their core competency. They design games, and they want the games to work. Fair enough.

randomhero00
2011-01-25, 11:27 AM
In my stories there is always at least one town/city (chaotic neutral) that uses undead labor as its major source of production of raw materials. They sit on some valued natural resource. So they are a rich town with highly paid mercs and necromancers. So people tend to leave em alone :)

Malachei
2011-01-25, 11:34 AM
In my stories there is always at least one town/city (chaotic neutral) that uses undead labor as its major source of production of raw materials. They sit on some valued natural resource. So they are a rich town with highly paid mercs and necromancers. So people tend to leave em alone :)

Hollowfaust: City of Necromancers, published in 2001, by Sword and Sorcery features an interesting city-state based on necromancy.

Havelock
2011-01-25, 11:39 AM
Assuming we are talking animating dead bodies into zombies and skeletons, and wait out the time period allowing for raise dead etc, then it really comes down to economics and morality. Is opening a conduit to the negative energy plane going to have adverse effects on the material, or not?

Ressurection will turn the undead back into a living person as long as you have a hair or something, True Ressurection will do the same, or possibly create a new body, since the soul is not bound to the undead creature (not so with the sort of undead that the spirit/soul of the former creature still inhabits the body).

If bringing in negative energy harms the living world in some way, then it's evil. If that is of no concern, and nobody is hurt (raise dead doesn't work on undead, for example, and it may be traumatizing for friends and family), things are purely economical.

Economical choice is a skeleton, costs 25GP to create +150GP for the spell +85 for desecrate, which allows you to get 20 of them, with total cost of 36.75 GP for each.

Then you need to control them, and for that, you need the caster, so the daily wage of a 5th level cleric? Likely more than the 2GP per day that 20 unskilled workers would cost.

Although you could get a wand of animate dead, and get an expert with UMD on staff, if he max that skill, he gets a +9 on the check, which would translate to less than 2GP per day for him to hang around and control them, he could probably lead the operation in the first place. Profit margin compared to having unskilled workers is like 4SP per day. Using one charge from a wand+one use of desecrate costs 405SP. So you'll make good on the investment in about 100 days. For a large operation, this would be worth the costs. Although bear in mind that D&D simply have not reached the industrial phase, not even close, so a large operation probably would not exist.

Although, I think most governments would simply ban the whole thing because having thousands of undead milling about in industrial complexes somewhere near a place you can sell goods, that's an army that can be turned on them by their owners or someone with sufficiently powerful spells.

monkey3
2011-01-25, 11:42 AM
person1: The undead are taking away all our jobs.

person2: They are only doing the jobs no one else wants to do.

continue... (actually please don't)

big teej
2011-01-25, 11:48 AM
as far as 'how' I'd rule that its up to the caster


speak with dead speaks with the corpse itself, not the spirit right?
but at the same time, there is precedence for the whole 'tortured spirit' thing, which has been covered above


if I really had to go into it in depth, I think I'd rule that its a matter of time.
I need to think on that more

as far as the resurection and true reseruction failing if the body is up and about.

I don't think it's to crazy to assume the reason for that is because you're returning the soul to the original body (even if it's being constructed from ash blown to the wind)

and thus having the body being up and about somewhere as a bone golem or skeleton 2354398 of the necromancer horde would block it.

/ramble.


on a related note
I actually have a necromancer character (and an NPC) that plan on ruling a nation similar to dr. dooms latveria with the undead replacing robots (nobody has to work unsafe jobs such as mining, the undead do it. nobody serves in the army, the undead do it. etc)

randomhero00
2011-01-25, 11:52 AM
Assuming we are talking animating dead bodies into zombies and skeletons, and wait out the time period allowing for raise dead etc, then it really comes down to economics and morality. Is opening a conduit to the negative energy plane going to have adverse effects on the material, or not?

Ressurection will turn the undead back into a living person as long as you have a hair or something, True Ressurection will do the same, or possibly create a new body, since the soul is not bound to the undead creature (not so with the sort of undead that the spirit/soul of the former creature still inhabits the body).

If bringing in negative energy harms the living world in some way, then it's evil. If that is of no concern, and nobody is hurt (raise dead doesn't work on undead, for example, and it may be traumatizing for friends and family), things are purely economical.

Economical choice is a skeleton, costs 25GP to create +150GP for the spell +85 for desecrate, which allows you to get 20 of them, with total cost of 36.75 GP for each.

Then you need to control them, and for that, you need the caster, so the daily wage of a 5th level cleric? Likely more than the 2GP per day that 20 unskilled workers would cost.

Although you could get a wand of animate dead, and get an expert with UMD on staff, if he max that skill, he gets a +9 on the check, which would translate to less than 2GP per day for him to hang around and control them, he could probably lead the operation in the first place. Profit margin compared to having unskilled workers is like 4SP per day. Using one charge from a wand+one use of desecrate costs 405SP. So you'll make good on the investment in about 100 days. For a large operation, this would be worth the costs. Although bear in mind that D&D simply have not reached the industrial phase, not even close, so a large operation probably would not exist.

Although, I think most governments would simply ban the whole thing because having thousands of undead milling about in industrial complexes somewhere near a place you can sell goods, that's an army that can be turned on them by their owners or someone with sufficiently powerful spells.

In my games you don't need to *control* the undead skeletons and zombies. It says if you go over your HD limit you lose control, and they become uncontrolled. However there's another clause in there that says they always repeat the last command ad infinitum. Which means a necro just needs to create some, give them a command (like "dig" or carry that ore from there to here) and then release his control and they'd just keep doing it. No where does it say that an uncontrolled skeleton attacks or stops doing what it was doing.

Telonius
2011-01-25, 11:55 AM
Religious answer: Undead are naughty, and you're naughty for using them.

Personal answer: Uncle Bob worked hard enough while he was alive, and now you want him after he's dead?

Union answer: Look, go through with this and we have no option but to strike... and I'm not talking about picketing...

randomhero00
2011-01-25, 12:03 PM
Personal answer: Uncle Bob worked hard enough while he was alive, and now you want him after he's dead?


Except there's no soul. That's not uncle bob. I'd be just like donating your body to science. In my undead labor force city its the only way to become a citizen (which has a lot of benefits for normal folk.)

Chilingsworth
2011-01-25, 12:10 PM
person1: The undead are taking away all our jobs.

person2: They are only doing the jobs no one else wants to do.

continue... (actually please don't)

Basically, this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh5pqt1sM8w) is why no massive undead labor force without severe depopulation first.

Set
2011-01-25, 12:35 PM
Personally, I always think one of the most consistently overlooked areas of this debate is the question of hygiene. Would you want, say, your food prepared by someone who's rotting, stinks to high heaven, infested with worms, maggots and other bacteria, probably a little bit on the 'drippy' side? :smalleek:

And yet, many arguments about necromancy state that negative energy is inherently antithetical to life itself, and that undead farmers couldn't work because the plants wouldn't grow around them, etc, etc.

If negative energy *is* antithetical to life, then a corpse animated by negative energy would be antithetical to bacteria, fungus, maggots, etc. possibly snuffing out their tiny lives the second they attempted to take purchase in its curiously preserved flesh. Flies would buzz around, perhaps attracted by the smell, but be afraid to land on the body, as animals tend to react badly to undead things (special training required, even for druid companions, to get them to attack undead, and some undead, like spectres, explicitly have animal-repelling auras that even affect higher HD critters).

A zombie, as counter to the 'design goal' of making undead as icky and gross as possible, to 'pump up' their 'evil quotient' (because we all know that unattractive equals evil and pretty equals good, from our upbringing) would probably be darn close to sterile, since nothing can actually live inside it's dead flesh. Decay would happen quite a bit slower, less a result of nibbling vermin and hungry micro-organisms and more a result of 'wear and tear' and natural erosion, which, since the tissues do not heal and replace themselves naturally, the way a living body's tissues do, would cause it to slowly flake apart, with the more action (and the climate conditions) increasing or decreasing the amount it takes for this to happen.

As for the digression about trapped souls;
Skeletons and zombies can't really have trapped souls inside of them, because;

A) animate dead isn't more powerful than magic jar, which lacks the power to tear a soul out of Pelor (or Asmodeus') clutches. No 3rd level spell trumps the power of the gods in their own planes. They earn those souls, and 5th level neutral clerics of Pelor can't wander onto a battlefield and rips the souls of orcs out of Gehenna to weaken the forces of evil by casting animate dead on the bodies of the fallen, and then sealing them away underground, leaving the evil gods without souls to fuel their power and fill their realms (similarly, the evil clerics can't go raid the tombs of paladins and priests to rip people out of Mount Celestia or Elysium or Arcadia either, or else there literally would be *no* souls in the upper or lower planes, except of those who had their bodies cremated).

B) skeletons and zombies are mindless. It's impossible to be tortured, in pain, anguished or suffering eternally, if the soul imprisoned in the flesh is insensate, non-sentient and unaware. If there was a screaming imprisoned soul suffering inside of that skeleton or zombie, then it would have sentience within it (even if the sentience wasn't in control of the body's actions), and would respond to spells like detect thoughts. Since the skeleton and zombie is mindless, it's logical to assume that this means that there is *no mind within it.*

Perhaps not as obvious as I would think, but logical, anyway.

C) skeletons and zombies, as of 3.5, are now evil, despite being mindless. The vast majority of them were probably made from neutral commoners, and yet they are *all* evil. For an orc, trapped in his rotting corpse, that's no shock, because he was already evil. For a commoner, well, maybe he went mad, and is evil because of the circumstances. But a Paladin? If his soul was dragged screaming out of Celestia, his *god* helpless to interfere, would he *instantly* turn evil, *every single time?* That doesn't make much sense. Do Paladins fall that easily, every single time? And really, if he's suffering and in anguish because it's so horrifying, how does turning him evil instantly justify that? Shouldn't allowing the soul to remain good (or at least neutral), so that it can be all morally offended by it's new undead existence be *more* exquisitely sadistic and evil than turning the Paladin's soul into an evil thing, that would be annoyed perhaps that it didn't get to be a wight or vampire or something cool, instead (since it's now evil, remember)?

Plus, there's another 'logical' progression. If casting animate dead on the corpse of a goodly priest or monk or paladin can instantly turn their soul evil (and we know that it has to, because the detect evil spell immediately detects *only* evil, not 'less than 5 HD, barely pings the evildar at all corpse, 10th level Paladin soul, overwhelmingly good, trapped within'), then any evil cleric can wander around the countryside, casting animate dead on every fallen body he finds, turning their souls evil, ripping them out of their afterlife, and then immediately destroying them, ensuring that their souls, freed rounds later as the zombies tear each other apart at his command, go straight to the Lower Planes, and join the ranks of his evil god's armies.

For the price of some onyx (less if he can get animate dead as an SLA), any evil cleric can utterly deplete the Upper Planes of souls, and ensure that every Paladin, good cleric, etc. that ever died (and didn't get his butt disintegrated, just to be safe) ends up Evil and serving his death-god in Gehenna or wherever.

I think that notion is kind of dark, and a bit absurd, and that's exactly what happens to the game setting if a 3rd level spell can tear souls out of the afterlife and turn them evil.

Luckily, the *rules* never say that animate dead steals souls, and the spells that actually *do* steal souls, Soul Bind or Trap the Soul, are much, much higher level, require the target soul to be present, don't affect a dozen people per casting, and *still* can't rip souls out of Upper or Lower planes, which, in fact, only spells like Raise Dead and Ressurection can do, and even then, they allow the recipient a *choice* whether or not to stay in heaven (or hell).

Some tortured reasoning, in an attempt to make animate dead even more morally repugnant than it actually is (and, contrarily, only serves to whitewash the act itself, by making stuff up to uglify it, as if it would somehow be okay if it *didn't* tear souls out of heaven and trap them in rotting bodies), is the only justification for this soul-stealing nonsense.

There's all sorts of in-game reasons why undead might make, or not make, useful or practical laborers. Making stuff up is hardly necessary.

Ressurection and Raise Dead don't work because they heal the body, and, as healing spells are wont to do, use positive energy (and not tiny sewing needles and conjured super-glue) to repair the body. Positive energy and negative energy have this weird inability to work well together. One of them called the other's momma fat, or dated his sister, or something. Nobody remembers why exactly. But the presence of a bunch of negative energy shooting all through the body prevents the positive energy from doing it's job, until you 'kill' the zombie, and the negative energy goes away, and then bang, ressurect away!


The soul thing would also explain this, but not explain why the soul doesn't return as evil, or with memories of torment, or insane, which, per the rules, it doesn't, since mindless evil zombies don't have memories, can't feel pain or emotional anguish and their alignment has nothing to do with the soul partying it up in Celestia, probably totally clueless about the fact that his body is being used to dig a ditch.

The negative energy / positive energy inability to play well together is well documented, and doesn't utterly destroy the game setting with people running around tearing each other out of heaven, or cheating Asmodeus out contracted souls by animating them and burying the zombies in a nice room with a view and ordering them to do whatever the soul inside them wants to do, making them immortal and successful devil-pact cheaters, surrounded by interesting books and other immortal pact-skippers, in some gentleman's club for devil-cheaters.

Inevitable counter-argument; 'Asmodeus wouldn't allow that!' Then why would Pelor allow that? Why would Bahamut allow that? Why would Torm allow that? Why would *any* god (or archdevil, or demon lord) allow the souls that are *theirs* to be ripped away from their clutches, if they could stop it from happening? They wouldn't, which means that animate dead, if it ripped souls out of the afterlife *would never work,* except on atheists.

And, since 'Asmodeus wouldn't allow that,' we'd need explicit text in the animate dead spell for each setting and it's gods, which would 'allow that,' and which are 'too weak to stop a 3rd level spell from poaching their afterlife.' After all, in many settings, Asmodeus isn't even a god, and certainly not one of the big impressive gods. Not even a patch on Pelor or Mysta or whatnot, and yet *their* followers don't have any explicit protection from being ripped out of their gods loving grasp by animate dead...

For the setting to work, and not degenerate into an endless jihad of rival faiths digging up and 'stealing' the souls of their followers, heroes and clergy, where *everyone* is cremated to prevent them from being ripped out of their afterlife and coffee-klatches of free-willed zombies, who paid good coin to be delivered from the Lower Planes and whose animated corpses have been ordered to 'do what the soul inside you wants,' running everything behind the scene with their devil-stolen riches and magical powers, the 'animate dead steals souls' trope needs to die.

And not be animated again. 'Cause that's [Evil].

LibraryOgre
2011-01-25, 12:36 PM
I'm actually, sorta, working on an article on the metaphysical impact of necromancy on the souls of the dead.

Aemoh87
2011-01-25, 12:38 PM
the only problem I have with undead labor is they don't squeal when you whip them.

BossMuro
2011-01-25, 12:46 PM
I don't get the arguments about how undead labour wouldn't work because people wouldn't want to give up thier jobs. People keep making comparisons to the industrial revolution, and to immigration and stuff like that, but guess what? The industrial revolution happened. Replacing people with robots happens, immigration happens. And that stuff arguably makes society run better.

Less jobs don't mean less wealth for the country, or a necessarily lower standard of living. People would just do what they did in the real world and work in unneeded service industry jobs to give the illusion of contributing to society.

Lapak
2011-01-25, 01:00 PM
In my games you don't need to *control* the undead skeletons and zombies. It says if you go over your HD limit you lose control, and they become uncontrolled. However there's another clause in there that says they always repeat the last command ad infinitum. Which means a necro just needs to create some, give them a command (like "dig" or carry that ore from there to here) and then release his control and they'd just keep doing it. No where does it say that an uncontrolled skeleton attacks or stops doing what it was doing.The problem with letting them go is that your basic unintelligent undead literally cannot understand commands detailed enough to do most jobs. Haul ore from X to Y, yeah, they could manage that. But 'dig?' Dig where, how long, in what kind of terrain, stop for what kinds of danger signs? They can't follow instructions complicated enough to plant or harvest crops efficiently or effectively, they can't mine without someone constantly keeping an eye on them to prevent cave-ins or redirect them to useful veins, they almost certainly can't do complex but self-contained tasks like weaving.

And if you do have controllers, the overseers will be exhausted, because they can't learn either. It would be like being the shift manager in a fast-food place where an entirely new staff starts work every day and have to be directed in every detail of how to do the most basic tasks.

Animated undead, are written, as good as warriors and that's about it - and they're only good at that because when the order is 'kill that guy' or 'attack anyone else who enters' the details of how it's done don't matter. The details actually do matter in grunt labor - people are good at it because people are smart, but undead would be a disaster.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 01:26 PM
I am working on a city, working title the Necropolis, that does just this. Basically it was a necropolis who animated the dead brought to it and have found there were very useful for menial tasks. Public works, pumping water, treadwheels in factories and cranes, street sweeping, all are tasks completed by unintelligent undead.Non-citizens are animated 5 years after death for 1 year spent in the city, Citizens for 1 year for every 5.

randomhero00
2011-01-25, 01:33 PM
They can't follow instructions complicated enough to plant or harvest crops efficiently or effectively, they can't mine without someone constantly keeping an eye on them to prevent cave-ins or redirect them to useful veins, they almost certainly can't do complex but self-contained tasks like weaving.
.

Your thinking too far ahead. They do menial tasks. Pull trows (sp?) Dig, who cares if they get smashed in a cave in? You have to think of perpetual motion cogs. Once you get that, their uses are almost unlimited. They could even be an engine for something like an automobile. Wouldn't go very fast but you get the point.

Edit: PS theyre perpetual motion machines think about the free power you could generate. like riverlesss mill, bladeless wind mills,,.,.etc thats assuming they dont discover electricity because of it.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-25, 01:39 PM
Undead Plowhorses. Undead Horse Carriages. Who said they needed to be Human Zombies?:smallbiggrin:

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 01:45 PM
Undead Plowhorses. Undead Horse Carriages. Who said they needed to be Human Zombies?:smallbiggrin:
Indeed, humanoid forms are only good in a certain areas.
Heck, I think it would be neat to homebrew a prestige class that animates undead that combines different bodies to make a much more useful undead.
Also, skeletons better then zombies. It's cleaner, the smell isn't as bad, they move faster, and no one is going to recognize the bones of Aunt Agatha who in lieu of taxes donated her body to the state.
Skeletons are anonymous to the untrained eye.

TheGeckoKing
2011-01-25, 02:05 PM
It's a bit wacky, but 3 Warforged Dread Necromancer overseers with their own legions could fix the "They need constant control" problem. The 3 undead legions are given a job each, for 8 hours, which the Warforged tirelessly direct. After 8 hours, the 3 Overseers all swap jobs in a circlular fashion, and take their undead workforce with them to a different job, to stave off Warforged Boredom. This continues pretty much all year round, occasionally swapping out the 3 Overseers for different ones so the first 3 can go on holiday, or something.

This can be simulated in other games/editions by a sentient construct taking levels in a necromancer-y class, or whatever.

In short, Nerull damned Warforged taking all the jobs..........

erikun
2011-01-25, 02:53 PM
You know, the more I am presented with this question, the less reasonable it seems. What exactly do you want something without intelligence to do? Sure, pushing a milling wheel or pulling a cart is simple enough, especially with someone watching them work. But something as simple as "take the stones from that pile and pile them up over here" would go wrong. Your undead would gather as much stone as they can carry from the first pile, drop them on the way to the second (and leave them there), and then just dump them on the ground with no sense of organization. Adding "carefully" to the instructions just makes the undead carry the stones one at a time to put them into neat piles, as something with no intelligence doesn't have the sense to grab a handful of stones, move them next to the pile, and then stack them correctly. Simply working an extra 8 hours a day won't compensate for such gross negligence.

And that's a rather simple job - I don't want to see what happens when a skeleton tried forging a sword or manning a ship.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 03:05 PM
"Push this lever down, then pull this lever up. Repeat indefinitely."
We call him Mister Pump.
"Walk"
In a treadwheel, this is all you need. a few gears and a clutch system and you have a powered crane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadwheel_crane) or gristmill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gristmill). Need More power? Stronger skeletons, faster skeletons, either work if you use the right gears.

erikun
2011-01-25, 03:17 PM
"Walk"
In a treadwheel, this is all you need. a few gears and a clutch system and you have a powered crane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadwheel_crane) or gristmill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gristmill). Need More power? Stronger skeletons, faster skeletons, either work if you use the right gears.
Yeah, I had already mentioned hooking them up to a millstone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millstone) wheel. You'd probably be better off just harnessing them and having them walk in circles than building anything as complex as a treadwheel for them to use.



"Push this lever down, then pull this lever up. Repeat indefinitely."
We call him Mister Pump.
What are you going to pump? Especially with the limits of medieval metalsmithing and construction.

Sure, your epic-level adventurer could use craft checks to create, say, a working water tower. But you epic-level adventurer could take sand and use craft checks to create a working nuclear reactor.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 03:35 PM
Yeah, I had already mentioned hooking them up to a millstone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millstone) wheel. You'd probably be better off just harnessing them and having them walk in circles than building anything as complex as a treadwheel for them to use.
For a gristwheel and other stationary structures, yeah, the harness makes more sense. But same principle. All you have to do is tell the undead to walk.


What are you going to pump? Especially with the limits of medieval metalsmithing and construction.


Running water? That's the big one I was thinking of. Also, engineering in this particular city is more advanced, early industrial in fact. Just like steam power allowed mechanical power away from water sources, so to necrolurgical engineering.

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 03:40 PM
Indeed, humanoid forms are only good in a certain areas.
Heck, I think it would be neat to homebrew a prestige class that animates undead that combines different bodies to make a much more useful undead

Sort of like an undead fleshwarper, eh? Only with actual warping of flesh by putting two (or more) things together. DIY undead owlbear. :smallbiggrin:


Your thinking too far ahead. They do menial tasks. Pull trows (sp?) Dig, who cares if they get smashed in a cave in? You have to think of perpetual motion cogs. Once you get that, their uses are almost unlimited. They could even be an engine for something like an automobile. Wouldn't go very fast but you get the point.

Edit: PS theyre perpetual motion machines think about the free power you could generate. like riverlesss mill, bladeless wind mills,,.,.etc thats assuming they dont discover electricity because of it.

That reminds me, actually. I believe in the early nanites/nanobots (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19870890/Updated_Nanobots_Conquer_D38;D_%28AC,_Attack,_and_ Skill_Records%29) in d&d thread someone proposed using shrink item permanency and animate dead to provide power to complex gear assemblies to make tanks and other things.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 03:45 PM
Sort of like an undead fleshwarper, eh? Only with actual warping of flesh by putting two (or more) things together. DIY undead owlbear. :smallbiggrin:
Sorta, but it would have to be very BIG owl, or a very small bear. To The Homebrew Cave, Robin!
By the way, I am guessing homebrew comes from well, the home brewing of fermented beverages. Does anyone know how it got connected to making your own rules for table top games?

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 03:49 PM
Sorta, but it would have to be very BIG owl, or a very small bear. To The Homebrew Cave, Robin!

I think maybe giant owls (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/owlGiant.htm) and black (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/bearBlack.htm)or brown (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/bearBrown.htm)bears will work for it. Owlbear'd be a boost in power for the black bear (or at least HD, I haven't really examined the stats) and a drop in power by one HD for the brown bear (which I think is appropriate because it's grafting an owl onto a bear, that's not going to make it more intrinsically harmful, just crazier)


By the way, I am guessing homebrew comes from well, the home brewing of fermented beverages. Does anyone know how it got connected to making your own rules for table top games?

Early game designer that had a penchant for making his own hootch? :smallconfused: No idea myself, but I've been curious about it myself.

Czin
2011-01-25, 03:55 PM
Yeah, I had already mentioned hooking them up to a millstone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millstone) wheel. You'd probably be better off just harnessing them and having them walk in circles than building anything as complex as a treadwheel for them to use.


What are you going to pump? Especially with the limits of medieval metalsmithing and construction.

Sure, your epic-level adventurer could use craft checks to create, say, a working water tower. But you epic-level adventurer could take sand and use craft checks to create a working nuclear reactor.

A nuclear reactor that would quickly undergo nuclear meltdown and render a city sized area uninhabitable for a few years, and the trees that survive would be radioactive to the point of giving every creature nearby instant cancer. Or perhaps they'd just grow 328 feet tall, sprout spines from their backs and spew blue atomic fire. :smalltongue:

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 04:07 PM
Assuming a society does not regard necromancy as inherently evil, and undead labor is fairly affordable, why wouldn't most people that need long term muscle-power decide to invest in a skeleton or zombie?

They don't tire. They don't complain. They never require fuel of any sort. Really, the only nuisance (in my mind) is that some types of undead will rot over time, and this may take a quite a while (depending on interpretations, of course).

Oh wait...there's the question of intelligence. How intelligent does manual labor need to be?problems

This is uncommon: "Assuming a society does not regard necromancy as inherently evil" ... in general (fantasy in general), messing with the dead harms the spirit of the departed in some way. In D&D, this has been interpreted in many ways, and all of the discussions I've seen where people claim that nothing happens to the soul as a result are extremely far fetched.
This is also uncommon: "They never require fuel of any sort." .. usually they require blood, flesh, brains or souls of the living to keep going, depending on the type of undead and the mythos.
This is also not that common "They don't tire" ... generally undead wear out; it even happens in D&D implicitly.
Keeping dead rotting tissue around is just asking for trouble; you're increasing your risk of exposure to diseases and all the other things that like to live on that tissue.
The smell, how they look and other unpleasant aesthetic considerations. The fact that they leave bits of themselves everywhere.
If they're not intelligent, then they're not really all that useful; they do horrible things while obeying in a very literal fashion. They have to be overseen so closely that they significantly reduce whatever savings in manpower they provide. Even the simplest instructions here are more complicated than an animal can understand, so they require high animal intelligence at the minimum.
If the undead is intelligent enough to really be useful, then they're slaves, with all of the unpleasantness that implies. Any arguments to the effect of "well, they're not really alive/a person/etc" is no different than the excuses given by slaveowners throughout history. (coincidentally enough, I'm currently re-listening to an audiobook of Feet of Clay by Terry Pratchett, and it makes a similar point with Golems)

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 04:16 PM
problems

This is uncommon: "Assuming a society does not regard necromancy as inherently evil" ... in general (fantasy in general), messing with the dead harms the spirit of the departed in some way.
Yes, but what if it doesn't. ANd also, what if it does? That can add to the conflict. Yes, you get clean streets, cheap products and a warm bath, but your using the souls of your ancestors, and eventually you, for this.

This is also uncommon: "They never require fuel of any sort." .. usually they require blood, flesh, brains or souls of the living to keep going.

Well, while that may be thematically true in many cases, unintelligent undead in D&D don't. Again, you can change this if you want, but its hardly a certainty.

Keeping dead rotting tissue around is just asking for trouble; you're increasing your risk of exposure to diseases and all the other things that like to live on that tissue

Use skeletons, nice clean bones and faster to boot. The processing may not smell nice, watch Dirty Jobs for someone who makes it their job cleaning bones for display purposes, the smell is disgusting, but so does tanning leather.

The smell, how they look and other unpleasant aesthetic considerations.
See point about skeletons.

If they're not intelligent, then they're not really all that useful; they do horrible things while obeying in a very literal fashion

Simple instructions, like manning a pump, turning a wheel, possibly even incredibly simple steps in an assembly line, could be programmed without repercussions.

TheGeckoKing
2011-01-25, 04:24 PM
That reminds me, actually. I believe in the early nanites/nanobots (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19870890/Updated_Nanobots_Conquer_D38;D_%28AC,_Attack,_and_ Skill_Records%29) in d&d thread someone proposed using shrink item permanency and animate dead to provide power to complex gear assemblies to make tanks and other things.

If that was implemented, Clerics could feasibly Turn/Rebuke TANKS. That's so far beyond Tier 1 the Overdeity itself is screaming in horror.

TheCountAlucard
2011-01-25, 04:36 PM
Heck, I think it would be neat to homebrew a prestige class that animates undead that combines different bodies to make a much more useful undead.Actually, they do this in Exalted 2e; they have a system by which you can build your own undead from spare parts and metal. :smallamused:

Grumman
2011-01-25, 04:38 PM
What are you going to pump? Especially with the limits of medieval metalsmithing and construction.
Medieval? The Ancient Greeks had pumps, in the form of the Archimedes' screw.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 04:42 PM
Actually, they do this in Exalted 2e; they have a system by which you can build your own undead from spare parts and metal. :smallamused:
Heh, I should have known. I mean, it IS Exalted.

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 04:45 PM
Yes, but what if it doesn't. ANd also, what if it does? That can add to the conflict. Yes, you get clean streets, cheap products and a warm bath, but your using the souls of your ancestors, and eventually you, for this.Same issues as with any other sort of slavery/torture, with the added bonus that it goes on forever (even death will not release you!).


Simple instructions, like manning a pump, turning a wheel, possibly even incredibly simple steps in an assembly line, could be programmed without repercussions.Repercussion: Without a reasonable level of intelligence, it's equivalent to machinery with no safety overrides. That undead is going to keep turning the crank, even if someone's hand is in there. Pump undead is going to contune to try and life and lower the level even if there's a stack of product under it that's getting broken. If something malfunctions slightly, it will continue going, breaking things worse, etc. If it has enough intelligence to add a reasonable level of safety overrides by verbal explanation ... you're dealing with slavery.

It takes time to set the undead up doing these actions, to stop them, to get them restarted; you have to add people to keep an eye on them on a regular basis to make sure they have continued to work properly; you have to have backups for when something fails (because you're setting up a situation where you depend on all of this working); all of which isn't insignificant.


Unfortunately, the how is left out of the rules.

There's some quirky bits in the rules that support the 'tortured spirit' interpretation, although they're not fully consistent, and they're not explicit. For instance, Resurrection (and even True Resurrection which needs nothing of the corpse) fails if the corpse is still walking around somewhere. Destroying the undead first will let it work, as will applying the spell directly to the active undead. Both of which support the 'prison of rotting flesh' bit, even though they're not conclusive.It's kind of hard to talk about this without delving into the realm of politics and religion (especially the latter). Over the years D&D made several changes in order to get away from the stigma that the game has been under; iirc, devils were removed entirely in 2nd edition for example. The things they left in tended to be implied rather than overt, which is why you still see the things that support the 'tortured spirit' interpretation in the rules rather than seeing it spelled out. It's exactly the sort of thing that will send some people into a tizzy about the game.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 04:58 PM
Same issues as with any other sort of slavery/torture, with the added bonus that it goes on forever (even death will not release you!).
And people have done slavery throughout history, considered it a normal thing. I am not saying it is right, I am saying people have been willing to do this kind of thing. And that is assuming it is the case, that an unintelligent undead harms or hurts the soul of the departed in some way.


Repercussion: Without a reasonable level of intelligence, it's equivalent to machinery with no safety overrides. That undead is going to keep turning the crank, even if someone's hand is in there. Pump undead is going to contune to try and life and lower the level even if there's a stack of product under it that's getting broken. If something malfunctions slightly, it will continue going, breaking things worse, etc. If it has enough intelligence to add a reasonable level of safety overrides by verbal explanation ... you're dealing with slavery.

It takes time to set the undead up doing these actions, to stop them, to get them restarted; you have to add people to keep an eye on them on a regular basis to make sure they have continued to work properly; you have to have backups for when something fails (because you're setting up a situation where you depend on all of this working); all of which isn't insignificant.

The best safety system is a human, Have a class like magewrights, call it a necroturgist or corpse crafter, who manage the undead 'machinery'. This is early industrial style technology, you think this is dangerous, ooh boy.
Also, include mechanical safety features. It doesn't matter if the arm keeps pumping if you disconnect the pump from the line, disengage the gears from the gristmill. Of course if a human gets in there and does something stupid, its going to have repercussions, but that always has been and always will be the case.

Chilingsworth
2011-01-25, 05:02 PM
And people have done slavery throughout history, considered it a normal thing. I am not saying it is right, I am saying people have been willing to do this kind of thing. And that is assuming it is the case, that an unintelligent undead harms or hurts the soul of the departed in some way.


The best safety system is a human, Have a class like magewrights, call it a necroturgist or corpse crafter, who manage the undead 'machinery'. This is early industrial style technology, you think this is dangerous, ooh boy.
Also, include mechanical safety features. It doesn't matter if the arm keeps pumping if you disconnect the pump from the line, disengage the gears from the gristmill. Of course if a human gets in there and does something stupid, its going to have repercussions, but that always has been and always will be the case.

Basically, more chances for Darwin Awards! Always a good time (for those who survive!)

JaronK
2011-01-25, 05:05 PM
I actually made a character whose goal was to overthrow the ruling classes of drow society and turn them into undead so that they did the menial labor for the poor overworked farmers and laborers. Necrocommunism, if you will. There were a few long term problems with his plan, but the idea is basically somewhat workable. In his case, he used spell stitching to get Animate Dread Warrior as a spell like ability (something you can do to any undead with 19 wisdom, at a high initial exp cost but it's free after that). Then twice a day he could turn any dead humanoid into something intelligent enough to handle 7 word instructions (including "follow that man's orders" as a start, so he could give them to the farmers who now become overseers). Fun times. That spell is much better than Animate Dead because one person can make an endless amount of them (limited only by time), because they're still somewhat intelligent, and because they retain class abilities (so a dead Cleric can be made to cast spells to summon food and the like).

And with these guys "work this pump unless something goes wrong" is a valid order. They're even smart enough to know what 'something goes wrong" means.

JaronK

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 05:06 PM
The best safety system is a human, Have a class like magewrights, call it a necroturgist or corpse crafter, who manage the undead 'machinery'. This is early industrial style technology, you think this is dangerous, ooh boy.
Also, include mechanical safety features. It doesn't matter if the arm keeps pumping if you disconnect the pump from the line, disengage the gears from the gristmill. Of course if a human gets in there and does something stupid, its going to have repercussions, but that always has been and always will be the case.You severely reduce your savings on manual labor; you've replaced cheap labor that required minimal supervision (because joe is smart enough to stop grinding when bob says "ouch it has my hand") with cheaper labor that requires more, better trained supervision, plus whole levels of people to do safety planning that weren't required before.

Another problem with unintelligent undead that just dumbly obeys orders: crimes committed using these undead reduce risk for criminals, and increase the difficulty on your police/protection.

Coidzor
2011-01-25, 05:06 PM
^: Gotta do something with the freed up manpower. You're not going to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you that there is not a net gain in terms of labor for the sane and reasonable uses of undead.

Now, what would constitute a sane and reasonable use...
If that was implemented, Clerics could feasibly Turn/Rebuke TANKS. That's so far beyond Tier 1 the Overdeity itself is screaming in horror.

Not particularly. The Borg Cube is more easily done, less creative, and basically invulnerable to non-osmium-based weaponry.


Basically, more chances for Darwin Awards! Always a good time (for those who survive!)

Well, any sane designer would make it so that one really had to work at it to set up a suicide scenario, so an award would be in order, yes.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 05:07 PM
Basically, more chances for Darwin Awards! Always a good time (for those who survive!)
Yep. In early Industrial Europe, safety features was the memory of your friends arm been chewed to bits by the gears.

HenryHankovitch
2011-01-25, 05:17 PM
And yet, many arguments about necromancy state that negative energy is inherently antithetical to life itself, and that undead farmers couldn't work because the plants wouldn't grow around them, etc, etc.

If negative energy *is* antithetical to life, then a corpse animated by negative energy would be antithetical to bacteria, fungus, maggots, etc. possibly snuffing out their tiny lives the second they attempted to take purchase in its curiously preserved flesh. Flies would buzz around, perhaps attracted by the smell, but be afraid to land on the body, as animals tend to react badly to undead things (special training required, even for druid companions, to get them to attack undead, and some undead, like spectres, explicitly have animal-repelling auras that even affect higher HD critters).

A zombie, as counter to the 'design goal' of making undead as icky and gross as possible, to 'pump up' their 'evil quotient' (because we all know that unattractive equals evil and pretty equals good, from our upbringing) would probably be darn close to sterile, since nothing can actually live inside it's dead flesh. Decay would happen quite a bit slower, less a result of nibbling vermin and hungry micro-organisms and more a result of 'wear and tear' and natural erosion, which, since the tissues do not heal and replace themselves naturally, the way a living body's tissues do, would cause it to slowly flake apart, with the more action (and the climate conditions) increasing or decreasing the amount it takes for this to happen.

Admittedly, applying real-world biology to undead is no less silly than applying real-world physics to magic spells; but it needn't be the case at all that negative energy is "sterile."

Necromancy includes decay and contagious disease among its effects, not just death and anti-healing energy. And both undead and Negative Plane outsiders are known to consume the living in some form or another, nevermind creatures like vampires and wights that explicitly spread and multiply by way of infectious disease. So--assuming microbial disease exists in D&D in the first place, which is pure assumption--even if negative energy does not benefit "normal" bacteria or other microbes, necromancy could be host to its own disease-bearing microbes, either as teeny-weeny outsiders, or as "normal" creatures corrupted and animated by negative energy. Just like their full-size undead cousins.

I think it's far more reasonable to ascribe to necromancy--if not the Negative Plane itself--all manner of decay, disease, and corrupting elements.

On a separate note, while it's pointed out that a skeleton turning a crank is a source of "free" energy, it's not necessarily true that it's a source of perpetual free energy. Mindless undead creatures do decay, becoming physically weaker and more fragile; game systems by their rules tend to differentiate between "fresh" undead and the old, falling-apart ones which are much weaker. It's entirely reasonable to assume that undead workers would wear themselves out, eventually to the point of uselessness; and it's not a stretch to say that this might happen quite quickly, if you're working them day after day. A skeleton that just lies around for months or years, only getting up for a minute or so at a time to hack apart some level-1 adventurer, is putting in a lot less working-hours on its frame than a skeleton hacking away at a mine for 20 hours every day. Depending on that fatigue rate, one could have a world where undead really are less cost-effective as laborers than peasants or working animals.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 05:21 PM
Is there any other undead besides skeletons and zombies, that are good for such labor?

By the way, either the society really doesn't care for the dead (hence, morality is no longer a roadblock when it comes to creating undead), or they truly DO care, and people sign over their bodies to become manual labor after they die (hence, morality is no longer a roadblock when it comes to creating undead).


Mindless undead creatures do decay, becoming physically weaker and more fragile; game systems by their rules tend to differentiate between "fresh" undead and the old, falling-apart ones which are much weaker.

Where, in D&D 3.5/Pathfinder, does it mention the rates at which undead break down?

JaronK
2011-01-25, 05:22 PM
Actually, the thought of negative energy bacteria would be interesting. It would be a non threat normally, due to the fact that there's not enough undead. But an undead based society might have enough for a plague to break out. Perhaps such bacteria are a major aspect of the negative energy damage that the negative energy plane causes? And thus that aspect might cross into the physical when you had enough...

And Rag: Animate Dread Warrior gets you Dread Warriors, which are FAR better than skeletons or zombies. You need the spell as a Spell Like Ability to avoid the exp costs, which usually requires spell stitching.

JaronK

ScionoftheVoid
2011-01-25, 05:23 PM
I like the idea of a skeleton semaphore system. Their only instruction is make the same movements as the thing standing in front of you, with a "stop" command to allow the inteligent being making the original signal to be switched out or to stop signals during low visibility, etc. Have them on towers just far enough apart that they can still see on another clearly, and if possible just high enough that someone attempting sabotage or hijacking needs to climb. Like the Discworld's clacks, but with skeletons instead of low-pay people at elevations they can be killed from if they fall.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 05:23 PM
And Ragitsu: Animate Dread Warrior gets you Dread Warriors, which are FAR better than skeletons or zombies. You need the spell as a Spell Like Ability to avoid the exp costs, which usually requires spell stitching.

JaronK

How intelligent are Dread Warriors?

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 05:28 PM
Where, in D&D 3.5/Pathfinder, does it mention the rates at which undead break down?Why does it matter what 3.5 D&D and pathfinder do? Keep in mind that this thread is also about fantasy in general, not even D&D in general let alone a specific edition of D&D.

I remember it being mentioned, at least in passing, in several places in 1e AD&D, though I don't think the rate was ever explicitly mentioned.

JaronK
2011-01-25, 05:29 PM
Original creature Int-4. However, they have the potential to become confused by any instruction that exceeds 7 words, so sometimes you have to be creative. Still, making a Dread Warrior of a craftsman should still let you give commands like "make masterwork spears out of these materials" and just keep that pile of materials full.

JaronK

Thiyr
2011-01-25, 05:30 PM
You severely reduce your savings on manual labor; you've replaced cheap labor that required minimal supervision (because joe is smart enough to stop grinding when bob says "ouch it has my hand") with cheaper labor that requires more, better trained supervision, plus whole levels of people to do safety planning that weren't required before.

Another problem with unintelligent undead that just dumbly obeys orders: crimes committed using these undead reduce risk for criminals, and increase the difficulty on your police/protection.

Better safety system: "Turn this crank until that light turns on". At that point, a small amount of gnome supervisors can take care of this fairly easily via racial dancing lights and/or cheap wands. Resetting them isn't too bad at that point, especially as fine-tuning what gets turned off becomes much easier. And if the areas aren't highly human inhabited, low risk as well (because why should the mindless motion be above ground at all? Gears can transfer energy easy enough. Otherwise it's the same as "don't stand in front of a train")

And I don't see how difficulty increases from criminals becoming undead. Police no longer need to avoid lethal force, they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend, and due to stronger economic situation, the potential for anti-undead security systems are much easier. Positive energy traps, having clerics on-staff as security, etc.

TheCountAlucard
2011-01-25, 05:36 PM
Why does it matter what 3.5 D&D and pathfinder do? Keep in mind that this thread is also about fantasy in general, not even D&D in general let alone a specific edition of D&D.In fact, Exalted specifically has rules for your necrotech creations degrading over time. :smallsmile:

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 05:42 PM
Why does it matter what 3.5 D&D and pathfinder do?

Because a lot of folk here are basing their answers with D&D in mind.

And really? Because I asked.

Jack_Simth
2011-01-25, 05:46 PM
As far as the supervision costs go, I don't see how it would be a problem whipping up some cheap magic item that would let a cleric transfer control of undead over to you. Or you could just have the owner say "do what that guy says." One overseer for every 5-10 zombies would probably work out well enough.

Like everyone else is saying, it would take a certain kind of society to do this: relatively low population, a lot of clerics, and probably some kind of work considered dangerous/unpleasant/dishonorable enough that they wouldn't want people doing it, but that's just details.
It doesn't take as many Clerics as you might think.

See, for a Cleric (or a Wizard with Arcane Disciple(Death Domain)), Animate Dead is a 3rd level spell - suitable for being made into an oil. As the person applying the oil is the effective caster, and uses the oil's caster level, this means that anyone can have zombies or skeletons under their control, at a market price of 100 gp per hit die (62.5 gp per hit die, if done with all the trimmings in a prepared area), plus the cost of the corpses. They're Instantly under your control, and stay that way until something alters it (although getting replacements one at a time gets expensive).

Paseo H
2011-01-25, 05:48 PM
One of my major villains/wild cards loves using zombies as cheap labor. Of course, he now smells completely like rotting flesh from being around them all day, but he doesn't care...even before he became a Humanoid Abomination he didn't care, but now he sees no real difference between living flesh and dead, rotting flesh.

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 05:51 PM
Because a lot of folk here are basing their answers with D&D in mind.Just because some people choose to limit their discussion doesn't mean that everyone should.


And I don't see how difficulty increases from criminals becoming undead. Police no longer need to avoid lethal force, they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend, and due to stronger economic situation, the potential for anti-undead security systems are much easier. Positive energy traps, having clerics on-staff as security, etc.Sorry, this doesn't make any sense.

"Police no longer need to avoid lethal force," why? In general they have to avoid it now because of innocent bystandars, and because of not knowing for sure that people are guilty. This doesn't change at all.

"they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend," Why? this assumes that there are less criminals, rather than more. You've replaced people who used to do manual labor, so people who used to aspire to being ditch diggers are left without a niche in society (this trope shows up in sci-fi on a fairly regular basis, though I can't name it off the top of my head).


and due to stronger economic situation, the potential for anti-undead security systems are much easier. Positive energy traps,These systems can't really differentiate between the skeleton butler that's bring you a drink and the one behind your office door that's about to decapitate you. The only solution is to not use them in indoor type jobs, with drastically reduces their usefulness. If all you want is unlimited power, there's plenty of other ways to do that with magic.


having clerics on-staff as security, etc.Clerics that can deal with undead are significantly higher trained than an average medieval policeman. Certainly you can deal with the added difficulty that this adds to crime fighting by spending more money on crime fighting... but it still detracts from the advantage that you get from the undead labor.

Saph
2011-01-25, 05:57 PM
I think the best explanation of this that I've seen was done by Lysander, in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151033). Go read it, it's REALLY good and has great RP potential. (It starts from the theory that negative energy is actually a lack of life energy, and runs from there.)

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 06:04 PM
(because why should the mindless motion be above ground at all? Gears can transfer energy easy enough.If it's not generated really close by to where you want to use it, you lose a LOT of energy due to friction.



(although getting replacements one at a time gets expensive).hmm... why more expensive if you replace them one at a time? I was under the assumption that you can only use that one one target, regardless of how many HD it works on. From Making Magic Items (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041214a): "Spells that can affect multiple targets can be made into potions or oils, but the potion or oil affects only one target, no matter what the potion's caster level."


I think the best explanation of this that I've seen was done by Lysander, in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151033). Go read it, it's REALLY good and has great RP potential. (It starts from the theory that negative energy is actually a lack of life energy, and runs from there.)interesting read

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 06:09 PM
Just because some people choose to limit their discussion doesn't mean that everyone should.

Who said anything about "choose to limit"? Believe it or not, some folks only use D&D/d20. Nothing wrong with that.

I know that's not the negative answer you were hoping for, but it is the truth.

And, that's partially what I based my question upon.

Thiyr
2011-01-25, 06:10 PM
Just because some people choose to limit their discussion doesn't mean that everyone should.

Sorry, this doesn't make any sense.

"Police no longer need to avoid lethal force," why? In general they have to avoid it now because of innocent bystandars, and because of not knowing for sure that people are guilty. This doesn't change at all.

"they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend," Why? this assumes that there are less criminals, rather than more. You've replaced people who used to do manual labor, so people who used to aspire to being ditch diggers are left without a niche in society (this trope shows up in sci-fi on a fairly regular basis, though I can't name it off the top of my head).

These systems can't really differentiate between the skeleton butler that's bring you a drink and the one behind your office door that's about to decapitate you. The only solution is to not use them in indoor type jobs, with drastically reduces their usefulness. If all you want is unlimited power, there's plenty of other ways to do that with magic.

Clerics that can deal with undead are significantly higher trained than an average medieval policeman. Certainly you can deal with the added difficulty that this adds to crime fighting by spending more money on crime fighting... but it still detracts from the advantage that you get from the undead labor.

a) Shoot the skeletons and shamblers, if you aren't just using positive-energy based weaponry and incapacitating weaponry in the first place. As for why there will be fewer, this assumes that, as you seemed to pose, undead become the criminal backbone. Either crime rates go up so high that everyone is a criminal (which I view as unlikely), or crime is primarily a few necromancers with a force of undead. At that point, fewer criminals (the necromancers themselves) and more tools (the undead) which can be either dismantled during arrest or re-purposed to public works. If we assume that everybody who was a ditch digger is suddenly jobless and that they're going to become criminals to survive, well, yea, suddenly there's a lot of criminals. unless this is all governmentally instituted, thereby making food stores a government resource, and by association meaning that to combat this, -they give away the now easily created surplus of food to citizens-.

b) Skeleton butler? That sound highly inconvenient (relying on a greater level of inteligence than is being assumed currently, as I am working with 3.5 undead, seeing as that is a system that I know and sticking to that means I can be consistent. Limiting myself so that people know where I'm arguing from). Not only that, but, even -if- we assume we're using skeletons for everything (which I'm not), put the defensive systems on exterior entrances and exits and don't order your butler to leave the house. Problem solved. And no risk to human invaders, meaning no accidental deaths. Human assassin comes in? Well, conveniently enough, -those traps won't stop undead body guards given standing orders to not leave the premises-.

c) why are we assuming average medieval police? Why not assume a more advanced police force for this decidedly more advanced technological period? Yes, police force costs rise. The price of security. But either we have people who are conscripted into the police force as part of citizenship, or we take the money we're not spending on -just about anything else- and funnel it there. Assuming, of course, that we're working with the average medieval police force we have no reason to assume we're working with.

EDIT: d) as for loss of energy, once again, not a huge issue if this is working 24/7. If 2 skeletons aren't enough, use 4, and so on. Efficiency isn't a huge worry at this point. And that's assuming we don't have the breakthrough of electricity, something that could easily be generated by this setup.

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 06:25 PM
a) Shoot the skeletons and shamblers, if you aren't just using positive-energy based weaponry and incapacitating weaponry in the first place. As for why there will be fewer, this assumes that, as you seemed to pose, undead become the criminal backbone. Either crime rates go up so high that everyone is a criminal (which I view as unlikely), or crime is primarily a few necromancers with a force of undead. At that point, fewer criminals (the necromancers themselves) and more tools (the undead) which can be either dismantled during arrest or re-purposed to public works. If we assume that everybody who was a ditch digger is suddenly jobless and that they're going to become criminals to survive, well, yea, suddenly there's a lot of criminals. unless this is all governmentally instituted, thereby making food stores a government resource, and by association meaning that to combat this, -they give away the now easily created surplus of food to citizens-. So, just destroy property at random?

And as noted above, it's not that expensive for non-necromancers to make their own undead. It's not valid to assume that you have a small group of criminals.

none of this allows for using lethal force more than you would be able to otherwise.


b) Skeleton butler? That sound highly inconvenient (relying on a greater level of inteligence than is being assumed currently, as I am working with 3.5 undead, seeing as that is a system that I know and sticking to that means I can be consistent. Limiting myself so that people know where I'm arguing from). Not only that, but, even -if- we assume we're using skeletons for everything (which I'm not), put the defensive systems on exterior entrances and exits and don't order your butler to leave the house. Problem solved. And no risk to human invaders, meaning no accidental deaths. Human assassin comes in? Well, conveniently enough, -those traps won't stop undead body guards given standing orders to not leave the premises-.You are a random merchant, and you walk out of a random coffeeshop; an undead worker (porter) pulls a knife out of the bundle it was carrying and stabs you, killing you. It uses a vial of animate dead oil on you, and orders you to follow it, with the 2 of you running into the river. Tracing who did that is significantly harder than if it was a person you could catch, trace and possibly interrogate. Sure, you can put up defenses in your house, but that has nothing to do with a supply of undead workers... the issue is when there's any hole in your defenses, that a ready supply of undead means that there are potentially assassins everywhere, and noone will really think of think of them as such until they strike, and that tracing them is next to impossible.


c) why are we assuming average medieval police?More advanced and more expensive = you're spending more time and money to combat a more difficult problem = I'm correct in that you have driven up the cost of crime fighting ... which was my point.


But either we have people who are conscripted into the police force as part of citizenship,conscript troops really care a lot about your problems. :smallbiggrin:

that sounds like a recipe for corruption and more corruption.


EDIT: d) as for loss of energy, once again, not a huge issue if this is working 24/7. If 2 skeletons aren't enough, use 4, and so on. Efficiency isn't a huge worry at this point.Losing energy to friction = heat = machinery breaking down. You can combat this with enough technology, and sufficient maintenance, but that raises costs significantly. And really, if you're going to take mechanical energy any significant distance, it takes such a significant increase in technology that using undead for power makes no sense. There's a reason why we (here in the real world) tend not to transfer mechanical energy directly over long distances.


And that's assuming we don't have the breakthrough of electricity, something that could easily be generated by this setup.infinite electricity is much easier made without undead.

Jack_Simth
2011-01-25, 06:44 PM
Except there's no soul. That's not uncle bob. That's... one interpretation.


as far as the resurection and true reseruction failing if the body is up and about.

I don't think it's to crazy to assume the reason for that is because you're returning the soul to the original body (even if it's being constructed from ash blown to the wind)

and thus having the body being up and about somewhere as a bone golem or skeleton 2354398 of the necromancer horde would block it.
Just to throw fuel on the fire, Resurrection and True Resurrection don't care if the person's corpse is part of a flesh golem. It's not mentioned. You'd need to house-rule that one in.


on a related note
I actually have a necromancer character (and an NPC) that plan on ruling a nation similar to dr. dooms latveria with the undead replacing robots (nobody has to work unsafe jobs such as mining, the undead do it. nobody serves in the army, the undead do it. etc)
You'll be interested in something else I've incorporated into this post, then. Anyone can be a handler, you see.


Crafting anything puts the cost into the thousands of gold easily... Which means in order to break even you are talking thousands of undead to replace thousands of workers... Large society could do it, but would they? Would they really think it wise to force a large number of their people to have nothing better to do then sit around and complain? You are looking at riots and discontented masses in this case. (unless you find something else for them or have some kind of weird manpower shortage)
Same problem with manufacturing in general. Yet it happened. Basically, someone sees a way they can probably do it less expensively with a higher initial investment, and takes a gamble on it. If uninterrupted, it often pays off.

Besides: NPC wealth of the minimum Cleric-5 to do this is likely to cover the startup costs anyway. One person can start it. Many people copy successful behaviors. If the first person to try it succeeds, there will be copycats in fairly short order.



Ressurection will turn the undead back into a living person as long as you have a hair or something, True Ressurection will do the same, or possibly create a new body, since the soul is not bound to the undead creature (not so with the sort of undead that the spirit/soul of the former creature still inhabits the body).
This explicitly does not work in D&D 3.5.

You can't use True Resurrection to return someone to life if their corpse is walking around as a skeleton on someone's farm. It's in the Resurrection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm) and True Resurrection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/trueResurrection.htm) spell description. If said skeleton falls off a cliff and gets destroyed (smashed into a thousand pieces when a 20d6 fall hits a 1d12 hp critter), True Resurrection will work again (as will Resurrection, if you have a piece of the corpse). This is explicit and clear-cut in D&D 3.5. However, if you apply Resurrection or True Resurrection directly to the active skeleton, then the skeleton becomes a living person again, regardless of whether or not the skeleton was killed, first. It's in the undead type description (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType); this is explicit and clear-cut in D&D 3.5.

The rules don't list a why of this. They are completely silent on the why (unless you count the 'Evil' tag on the spells that make undead). But it's not much of a stretch at all to go the 'trapped soul' route (incidentally, this also makes Animate Dead the cheapest way to keep someone from coming back).
Economical choice is a skeleton, costs 25GP to create +150GP for the spell +85 for desecrate, which allows you to get 20 of them, with total cost of 36.75 GP for each.

Then you need to control them, and for that, you need the caster, so the daily wage of a 5th level cleric? Likely more than the 2GP per day that 20 unskilled workers would cost.

Although you could get a wand of animate dead, and get an expert with UMD on staff, if he max that skill, he gets a +9 on the check, which would translate to less than 2GP per day for him to hang around and control them, he could probably lead the operation in the first place. Profit margin compared to having unskilled workers is like 4SP per day. Using one charge from a wand+one use of desecrate costs 405SP. So you'll make good on the investment in about 100 days. For a large operation, this would be worth the costs. Although bear in mind that D&D simply have not reached the industrial phase, not even close, so a large operation probably would not exist.
With Oils, Wands, or Scrolls of Animate Dead, you just have your handler do it. Wands and Scrolls require the handler either have the spell on their list, or have UMD. Oils are more expensive, but don't. Potentially, you can have an untrained laborer supervising your skeletons... if you have the untrained laborer create them. Just don't get him annoyed enough to quit, as your equipment will walk off the farm with him.

A charge from a Cleric-built Wand of Animate Dead (Usable by Cleric-1's, Wizard-1's, Sorcerer-1's, NPC Adept-1's (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/adept.htm), and probably several other classes (I'd need to double-check, but I think the Magical Training Regional Feat will also let you use wands without a roll, if the spell is on the Sor/Wiz list) costs 475 gp for the basic method (no Desecrate) and can get you ten human skeletons. Who don't need food or housing. An untrained hireling costs 1 sp/day. If you'd otherwise need ten untrained hirelings (1 gp/day), you make up your costs after 475 days of operation.

If we upgrade efficiency a bit by spending more initially, the charge from the wand costs 725 gp (including materials for 20 HD of undead per charge in the wand), and the Desecrate spell costs 120 gp (25 gp for materials for the vial of Unholy Water, 10 gp for the casting of Curse Water to get the unholy water, 25 gp for the powdered silver, 60 gp for the casting of Desecrate). 845 gp for 20 commoner-1 skeletons, under the control of whoever activated the wand. 42.25 gp per skeleton. If you'd otherwise be using untrained labor at 1 sp/day, you make up the difference after 422.5 days. Assuming you're the one who activated the wand.

Do note that most attempts at starting a business require that you at least reach break even within five years. This requires a little under a year and a half, if you'd qualify to use the wand yourself, and are the supervisor for the laborers.


Although, I think most governments would simply ban the whole thing because having thousands of undead milling about in industrial complexes somewhere near a place you can sell goods, that's an army that can be turned on them by their owners or someone with sufficiently powerful spells.
Eh, that applies to a lot of things that happen anyway.



hmm... why more expensive if you replace them one at a time? I was under the assumption that you can only use that one one target, regardless of how many HD it works on. From Making Magic Items (Part Two) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041214a): "Spells that can affect multiple targets can be made into potions or oils, but the potion or oil affects only one target, no matter what the potion's caster level."Mostly because I sometimes miss things.

Wand, then. Cheaper, but requires a slightly more complex user.

Jayabalard
2011-01-25, 06:49 PM
Eh, that applies to a lot of things that happen anyway.

Mostly because I sometimes miss things.

Wand, then. Cheaper, but requires a slightly more complex user.I wasn't sure if that article really was correct, since I couldn't find that reference in the SRD.

Still, the oil is a pretty interesting way of cleaning up after a murder. The murderer leaves by one exit why the victim disposes of himself.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 06:58 PM
What of the Deathless/positive energy undead in Eberron? Any reason we can't have positive energy skeletons?

Saph
2011-01-25, 07:01 PM
I always thought "positive energy undead" were a silly concept. If you can reanimate someone with positive energy, what's the point of the negative version?

Czin
2011-01-25, 07:02 PM
What of the Deathless/positive energy undead in Eberron? Any reason we can't have positive energy skeletons?

In Greyhawk as well as the Forgotten Realms, positive energy undead is an oxymoron since Greyhawk says in no uncertain terms that Positive Energy is the energy of life and Negative Energy is exclusively the energy of unlife. You cannot have unlife with life energy in Greyhawk, so outside of Eberron and other settings that follow it's example, your point is moot.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 07:06 PM
I always thought "positive energy undead" were a silly concept. If you can reanimate someone with positive energy, what's the point of the negative version?

A few reasons (most, if not all, having no basis in D&D rules as-is) I can think of:


It may be cheaper to channel negative energy.
The caster in question could be Evil.
When dealing with whether or not someone's body can be used as labor, positive energy requires consent. Negative energy does not.
The means to harness positive energy in such a way, could be far less known.

zimmerwald1915
2011-01-25, 07:15 PM
There's an argument to be made that undead labor does not usher in the abolition of work and the reign of leisure, but rather the institutionalization of truly massive unemployment. After all, the D&D world is, by RAW, a money economy, one that moreover depends on the periodic injections of "lost" gold into the economy in order to run (Adventuring as pump-priming; tell your Keynesian friends). Replacing workers with undead means eliminating those people's source of income, and with it their means of survival and reproduction. Distributing the fruits of the undead's labor for free does not work, because it makes the creation of every undead a money sink (remember that 1 HD undead cost 25gp worth of black onyx to create, and that the value of 1gp in the transition to the undead economy can't be expected to remain the same) and thus not worth anyone's time.

This is going to have political effects as well. Once people catch on to the fact that undead labor is a ticket to starvation, they aren't going to be too happy. Some might even revolt. Of course, they'll be crushed, since any undead economy relies on the support of large numbers of clerics and/or wizards, and the commoners will get slaughtered if they try to go up against these and their undead.

Finally, there's the argument that, to paraphrase Spock, "labor is the right of all sentient beings". That's not to say that any particular regime of work is just because it puts people to work, but rather than the creative act of labor is something natural to beings, part of what makes beings, beings. Remove the necessity to labor and you get people who create. Remove beings from the act of labor, however, and deny them the means to survive doing something else, and you get either empty shells of people or the humans from WallE, depending on how well you are able to feed them.

EDIT: note that none of these arguments actually touches upon the creation of undead as such, but their social role in the OP's projected undead economy.

Kami2awa
2011-01-25, 07:22 PM
I can see a few more problems:

- a lot of cultures, especially more traditional ones, have very strict traditions for burial/other disposal and the ceremonies for the dead. The consequences of not doing them are often said to be dire; often, they are said to lead to the dead returning as vengeful spirits. In a fantasy setting, this is quite likely to be true.

- having a lot of non-skeletal undead around is going to be a major health hazard (depending on how fast they decay). There will be infestations of rats and other vermin and this may well lead to plague outbreaks.

- trade unions; or guilds in an older setting. Workers are unlikely to enjoy losing their jobs to the dead, and in our own history rioting and rebellion have resulted when workers have been replaced with machines. The ruling classes may be unwilling to risk the rebellion that might result.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 07:27 PM
I can see a few more problems:

- a lot of cultures, especially more traditional ones, have very strict traditions for burial/other disposal and the ceremonies for the dead. The consequences of not doing them are often said to be dire; often, they are said to lead to the dead returning as vengeful spirits. In a fantasy setting, this is quite likely to be true.

True, but since there is an infinite/near-infinite amount of D&D "universes", I am sure there are also a lot of cultures without such taboos.


- having a lot of non-skeletal undead around is going to be a major health hazard (depending on how fast they decay). There will be infestations of rats and other vermin and this may well lead to plague outbreaks.

"Clean" undead, like skeletons, are around to be used. How about the spell Gentle Repose?


- trade unions; or guilds in an older setting. Workers are unlikely to enjoy losing their jobs to the dead, and in our own history rioting and rebellion have resulted when workers have been replaced with machines. The ruling classes may be unwilling to risk the rebellion that might result.

Yes, but we got over that. I am sure others could as well.

Thiyr
2011-01-25, 07:36 PM
So, just destroy property at random?

Destroy property at random with what? How is targeting the undead first or using things that only affect the undead going to destroy property at random?


And as noted above, it's not that expensive for non-necromancers to make their own undead. It's not valid to assume that you have a small group of criminals.

If the methods are publicly available, it's cheap. And that does nothing for controlling your creations.


none of this allows for using lethal force more than you would be able to otherwise.

I will concede this point. However, it does demonstrate that it is easier to halt criminals non-lethally.


You are a random merchant, and you walk out of a random coffeeshop; an undead worker (porter) pulls a knife out of the bundle it was carrying and stabs you, killing you. It uses a vial of animate dead oil on you, and orders you to follow it, with the 2 of you running into the river. Tracing who did that is significantly harder than if it was a person you could catch, trace and possibly interrogate. Sure, you can put up defenses in your house, but that has nothing to do with a supply of undead workers... the issue is when there's any hole in your defenses, that a ready supply of undead means that there are potentially assassins everywhere, and noone will really think of think of them as such until they strike, and that tracing them is next to impossible.

This whole scenario implies, contrary to the setup I posed, that the undead are used by private parties, making it a non-issue. It also assumes a level of intelligence that you have previously deemed beyond the undead. And this assumes that undead assassins are any more risky than, say, a golem assassin. Or, for that matter, any intelligent race as an assassin. Which are harder to defend against. Home defenses have nothing to do with the undead work force, which I have stated is more public utility. It is not something you see on the street carrying crates. It is something underground turning the generator, or the grindstone, or pumping the water. The only risk are if you're using them as farmhands, which even then isn't altogether risky provided some relatively simple defensive measures.


More advanced and more expensive = you're spending more time and money to combat a more difficult problem = I'm correct in that you have driven up the cost of crime fighting ... which was my point.

Yes, and I didn't attempt to deny your point. I was trying to point out that the increased cost there is still lower than the savings such a system would implement, if it's even needed.


conscript troops really care a lot about your problems. :smallbiggrin:
If the conscription is used as a replacement for taxes to pay for otherwise free utilities and food, potentially with luxuries at some point, then I feel that the populous would care, especially if they know this is merely a temporary situation.


that sounds like a recipe for corruption and more corruption.

no more than any alternative.


Losing energy to friction = heat = machinery breaking down. You can combat this with enough technology, and sufficient maintenance, but that raises costs significantly. And really, if you're going to take mechanical energy any significant distance, it takes such a significant increase in technology that using undead for power makes no sense. There's a reason why we (here in the real world) tend not to transfer mechanical energy directly over long distances.

True. This means that instead of having everything powered off of one central power source, you use smaller ones until the discovery of electricity, at which point you aren't transferring mechanical energy far at all. And even beyond that, what is causing the cost to be that high? Materials? No, as said materials could be gathered not unlike the above posed farm solution with this same work force. Turning raw materials to parts? Simple labor, or at least simpler than your posed assassination plot. Simple enough that if you leave one example, it wouldn't be difficult to once again get this work force to make the mechanical parts. Finer parts would require a workforce that could easily work similarly to the guards posed above. Why pay taxes when you instead get a job that covers the cost of everything you need garunteed? Then the problem is doing maintenance. Except maintenance can -still- be covered by these same people, if not a single taskmaster overseeing an undead workforce.


infinite electricity is much easier made without undead.

And the relevancy of that is? That does nothing to make the use of undead any less effective, it merely provides a more efficient alternative. Or its more efficient given different circumstances. Different solutions work better for different situations, and I think it has been fairly well demonstrated that any issues in the undead labor has little to do with the undead and more to do with the people controlling them, at which point there is no logical reason to say "It's the undead that's the problem"


Ultimately, however, I think the biggest problem is trying to implement this on a pre-existing society. Starting from this as a founding principle works, but there will be growing pains if you decide to -change- to this. Over time those pains leave, but that's something expected at least initially.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 07:41 PM
How much does it cost to Permanency Gentle Repose anyhow? Probably not worth it for a worker group of human zombies, but definitely for a Large or larger size zombie.

zimmerwald1915
2011-01-25, 07:53 PM
Yes, but we got over that. I am sure others could as well.
Not sure how to respond to this without referencing current [and ongoing] events.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 08:18 PM
Not sure how to respond to this without referencing current [and ongoing] events.

The Industrial Revolution is a current event?

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 10:55 PM
The Industrial Revolution is a current event?
At the very least, the results of it still are.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 10:58 PM
At the very least, the results of it still are.

Fair enough, but the brunt of the initial revulsion and rebellion are long past.

Jack_Simth
2011-01-25, 11:07 PM
How much does it cost to Permanency Gentle Repose anyhow? Probably not worth it for a worker group of human zombies, but definitely for a Large or larger size zombie.
It's not on the list, so you'd need to research it, but pattern says it's be 1,000 xp or 1,500 xp.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-25, 11:17 PM
Fair enough, but the brunt of the initial revulsion and rebellion are long past.
Pretty much in my opinion. It's up to the Mods to decide if its kosher or not though.

It's not on the list, so you'd need to research it, but pattern says it's be 1,000 xp or 1,500 xp.
Or just make skeletons. Though the process itself would be less then kind to the nose, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R7eqMug-wo)once clean I doubt you would smell much.

Duncan_Ruadrik
2011-01-25, 11:22 PM
In a country of my campaign world, there was a history of humans using undead as laborers, and intelligent undead as repositories of knowledge and as advisors. As time went by, the intelligent undead realized that humanity was too unstable and short term in view to governor truly efficiently. (also, undead were getting the short end of the stick, and intelligent undead decided they deserved better)

Now, humans are skilled laborers (which few undead can manage due to decomposing or skeletal/dessicated fingers)

Undead are a ruling aristocracy which wealthy humans can buy into.

Mindless undead are used as manual laborers and infantry grunts. Most of the criminal punishments involve death, and then being raised as a mindless undead soldier/laborer.

Also, when you die naturally (or otherwise) you are raised to "serve your country" as a soldier. Unless your family buys you "permanent burial" (middle class or better)

This way undead need humans as a resource pool, but permits people to lead somewhat normal (if oppressed) lives.

Ragitsu
2011-01-25, 11:35 PM
In a country of my campaign world, there was a history of humans using undead as laborers, and intelligent undead as repositories of knowledge and as advisors. As time went by, the intelligent undead realized that humanity was too unstable and short term in view to governor truly efficiently. (also, undead were getting the short end of the stick, and intelligent undead decided they deserved better)

Now, humans are skilled laborers (which few undead can manage due to decomposing or skeletal/dessicated fingers)

Undead are a ruling aristocracy which wealthy humans can buy into.

Mindless undead are used as manual laborers and infantry grunts. Most of the criminal punishments involve death, and then being raised as a mindless undead soldier/laborer.

Also, when you die naturally (or otherwise) you are raised to "serve your country" as a soldier. Unless your family buys you "permanent burial" (middle class or better)

This way undead need humans as a resource pool, but permits people to lead somewhat normal (if oppressed) lives.

Hey, that's actually a pretty cool idea for a setting.

Duncan_Ruadrik
2011-01-25, 11:43 PM
Its not even the primary setting, lol.

Its just a stopover for a sidequest in a wide ranging, world spanning campaign.

There is also a group of (living) rebels who are trying to throw off the yoke of the undead rulers.

There are also roving "wild" or "feral" undead that torment the outlying areas of habitation that are mostly small farming villages which havent been converted to undead laborers... nominally under the control of the undead overlords (in that they are "taxed" both resources and dead bodies) but have minimal protection from the government.

To carry arms as an individual you need permits. to carry arms as a group, you must have a "letter of marquee" from the government to hunt feral undead: IN theory that is the only permissible reason to carry weapons.

Jayabalard
2011-01-26, 10:27 AM
Destroy property at random with what? How is targeting the undead first or using things that only affect the undead going to destroy property at random?

If the methods are publicly available, it's cheap. And that does nothing for controlling your creations.

I will concede this point. However, it does demonstrate that it is easier to halt criminals non-lethally.the pieces that I said made no sense were "Police no longer need to avoid lethal force," and "they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend,"

your conclusion (especially the last bit) is kind of the opposite of that now.

Going back a little further, my whole point of this was that cheap, mindless undead being readily available is going to be harder to deal with crime, meaning: cost more money, take more people, need enhanced security, require higher trained security/crime prevention forces, increase the number of criminals (due to niche infringement), etc. None of what you've presented contradicts that; your counter seems like it can be summed up as something like "you can spend more money on it, throw more highly trained people at it, and dedicate more resources to it and deal with that problem and have less crime" ... which is kind of the opposite of a counter-argument.

It parallels what has happened in the real world as we've become more industrialized.


This whole scenario implies, contrary to the setup I posed, that the undead are used by private parties, making it a non-issue.That doesn't match the scenario provided by the OP and others in the thread: undead are fairly cheap, able to be made and controlled by anyone and are used widely as labor...

So I don't really feel any reason to stay constrained to your scenario (especially since this particular line of discussion started with you responding to me, not vice versa).


It also assumes a level of intelligence that you have previously deemed beyond the undead.No, I've insisted that it's an either/or sort of situation: that either you have non-sapient, non-intelligent undead, or you have sapient undead that are actually slaves. Most people want to avoid the issues that having a slave owning society has, so the trend is to focus discussion on the former rather than the latter.


And this assumes that undead assassins are any more risky than, say, a golem assassin. Or, for that matter, any intelligent race as an assassin. They're cheaper by far; you can afford to have a dozen (or even a hundred) fail if one manages to succeed. They're also harder to trace than an intelligent race as an assassin (which might sell you out if they fail and are captured)


If the conscription is used as a replacement for taxes to pay for otherwise free utilities and food, potentially with luxuries at some point, then I feel that the populous would care, especially if they know this is merely a temporary situation.

no more than any alternative.
Sure, the populous might care... the conscript troops, not so much. And the level of corruption in conscript armies has historically been much higher than in non-conscript armies, so I think it's clear that it is indeed more than some of the alternatives.



And the relevancy of that is? That does nothing to make the use of undead any less effective, it merely provides a more efficient alternative.Creating electricity is much easier and cheaper to accomplish using magic without using undead to turn cranks. Using undead strictly to create mechanical or electrical power is extremely inefficient compared to the alternatives, so any scenario where that is the primary use of undead labor is not very believable.

Analogous situation: in the real world, horses were replaced by the internal combustion engine. If during the stone age, the Internal combustion engine had been easier to invent, and cheaper to run than domesticating horses, then I find it highly unlikely humans would have never bothered to domesticate horses; even if we did, we certainly wouldn't have used them for producing power on anything but a very small scale (and certainly wouldn't have a term as ubiquitous as horsepower.)


True. This means that instead of having everything powered off of one central power source, you use smaller ones until the discovery of electricity, at which point you aren't transferring mechanical energy far at all. And even beyond that, what is causing the cost to be that high? Materials? No, as said materials could be gathered not unlike the above posed farm solution with this same work force. Turning raw materials to parts? Simple labor, or at least simpler than your posed assassination plot. Simple enough that if you leave one example, it wouldn't be difficult to once again get this work force to make the mechanical parts. Finer parts would require a workforce that could easily work similarly to the guards posed above. Why pay taxes when you instead get a job that covers the cost of everything you need garunteed? Then the problem is doing maintenance. Except maintenance can -still- be covered by these same people, if not a single taskmaster overseeing an undead workforce.I'm a little confused here... the piece you quoted is disagreeing with the statement "(because why should the mindless motion be above ground at all? Gears can transfer energy easy enough."

I don't see how this supports that; having them underground and transferring mechanical energy, even if it's fairly local (say 10 feet underground, and then transferring that energy around a 40' x 10' x 10' assembly line) requires such a large technological jump (primarily materials science) that using skeletons to produce power is extremely far fetched except in very small, direct applications.

I can't really tell if you've changed your mind about the earlier point, and if so, what point you're trying to make.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-26, 11:24 AM
Seriously, we're just using skeletal horses to turn a gigantic screw around. Say, to draw lake water up into a dam, so that we can release said water back down into the lake, turning a turbine along the way, generating power. What's so evil about that?:smallmad:

Thiyr
2011-01-26, 01:11 PM
the pieces that I said made no sense were "Police no longer need to avoid lethal force," and "they have fewer thinking opponents to catch and apprehend,"

your conclusion (especially the last bit) is kind of the opposite of that now.

Going back a little further, my whole point of this was that cheap, mindless undead being readily available is going to be harder to deal with crime, meaning: cost more money, take more people, need enhanced security, require higher trained security/crime prevention forces, increase the number of criminals (due to niche infringement), etc. None of what you've presented contradicts that; your counter seems like it can be summed up as something like "you can spend more money on it, throw more highly trained people at it, and dedicate more resources to it and deal with that problem and have less crime" ... which is kind of the opposite of a counter-argument.


You missed two big parts of my point: There will be less living criminals, and that even increasing the cost of crime prevention, the cost of living will still be down overall. I admit that the "lethal force" was poorly though out, and i rescinded that argument. However, I still see no reason or evidence that doing this would significantly raise the amount of criminals. Improved training, equipment, and knowing that the primary increase in criminal activity will be from the undead means that even if equipment must be upgraded, it becomes specialized, and even in there are lots of undead, the security, being capable of thought, can still deal with the skeletons easily if they're unmanned, and can focus on the controller if manned.



It parallels what has happened in the real world as we've become more industrialized.

You mean we've got infinite energy, everyone is a criminal with equal access to said infinite energy, and anyone can become a crime boss with light effort? That's...not what industrialization has done as far as I'm aware.


That doesn't match the scenario provided by the OP and others in the thread: undead are fairly cheap, able to be made and controlled by anyone and are used widely as labor...

That isn't the position posed. Undead are: affordable. Affordable for this doesn't mean cheap. Joe Dirtfarmer isn't going to get a skeleton. Frank Plantationowner, however, would. It says nothing about how easy to control they are at all, meaning not everyone could control them, and similarly, it doesn't mention how widely they're used as labor. We can assume they're commonplace, but we don't have to assume that every other person on the street is actually a skeleton.


So I don't really feel any reason to stay constrained to your scenario (especially since this particular line of discussion started with you responding to me, not vice versa).

That's fine. But within the confines of my argument (aka: what I was arguing), the problems you were posing weren't relevant. It doesn't matter who I respond to if the points you were making were irrelevant to my argument.



No, I've insisted that it's an either/or sort of situation: that either you have non-sapient, non-intelligent undead, or you have sapient undead that are actually slaves. Most people want to avoid the issues that having a slave owning society has, so the trend is to focus discussion on the former rather than the latter.

And if we're focusing on non-intelligent undead, like just about everybody else in the discussion, then what you're posing doesn't work. If we focus on what you're discussing, the debate is moot already, as it is slavery. You said it yourself, we're avoiding the issues of slave ownership, because most of us (in an attempt to remain on the same page, at least for me) are arguing out of 3.5. Want to argue a different system? Fine, but do the rest of us a favor and define your terms first. What are undead, and how are they made? How do they interact with the world? All that jazz. Because if you don't at least do some of that, you can "win" any argument by changing the terms on us (which really makes the whole discussion pointless).



They're cheaper by far; you can afford to have a dozen (or even a hundred) fail if one manages to succeed. They're also harder to trace than an intelligent race as an assassin (which might sell you out if they fail and are captured)

Once again, intelligence as an issue. If they're intelligent enough to do an assassin plot, then they're intelligent enough to find the basic loophole (Sure, I'll assassinate him. Eventually. What'll you do, kill me again? Thanks!) If you keep throwing skeletons at it (and how are you affording this? As stated above, these things aren't a dime a dozen. 25gp per HD is already more expensive than using human workers for that. It only works otherwise as a long-term solution.) then after, oh, the first time, most everyone with a functioning brain will know they're targeted, meaning they can either report to public security and gain protection, or fall back on private security (and why would lower class shopkeeps be targeted again? That premise doesn't have much support. If its cost effective to make skeletal assassins to kill a person, you may as well just do it yourself)



Sure, the populous might care... the conscript troops, not so much. And the level of corruption in conscript armies has historically been much higher than in non-conscript armies, so I think it's clear that it is indeed more than some of the alternatives.

It depends on the societal setup. As I believe I noted before (though if I forgot, I apologize), this is intended as how a society would be working from the beginning, as opposed to attempting to enforce this onto a pre-existing population. Additionally, I admit that I may have been unclear with another point. Conscription is a poor choice of term on my part. Working with the setup I had posed before (because why argue this point if we're not assuming the rest of it), this "conscription" is mandatory. However, it is not purely in a security function. Security, public works maintenance, etc, are covered by this, meaning not everyone is forced into security. Incentivise the less popular options (shorter work period, greater rations, etc), and the spread of people across the various jobs will be wider.



Creating electricity is much easier and cheaper to accomplish using magic without using undead to turn cranks. Using undead strictly to create mechanical or electrical power is extremely inefficient compared to the alternatives, so any scenario where that is the primary use of undead labor is not very believable.

Analogous situation: in the real world, horses were replaced by the internal combustion engine. If during the stone age, the Internal combustion engine had been easier to invent, and cheaper to run than domesticating horses, then I find it highly unlikely humans would have never bothered to domesticate horses; even if we did, we certainly wouldn't have used them for producing power on anything but a very small scale (and certainly wouldn't have a term as ubiquitous as horsepower.)

Not a great analogy. Fuel-consuming power -> more efficient fuel consuming power =/= non-fuel-consuming power -> more efficient fuel consuming power.

Show me where magic can be used to provide an unending stream of power, either mechanical or electrical, without burning some kind of fuel (be it spell slots, human fatigue, etc), and I'll likely concede. But as it stands, undead still have the upside of having a decidedly minimal upkeep cost.



I'm a little confused here... the piece you quoted is disagreeing with the statement "(because why should the mindless motion be above ground at all? Gears can transfer energy easy enough."

I don't see how this supports that; having them underground and transferring mechanical energy, even if it's fairly local (say 10 feet underground, and then transferring that energy around a 40' x 10' x 10' assembly line) requires such a large technological jump (primarily materials science) that using skeletons to produce power is extremely far fetched except in very small, direct applications.

I can't really tell if you've changed your mind about the earlier point, and if so, what point you're trying to make.

What jump is it that is being assumed here? You're being so vague about what is and isn't the current state of technology that I just don't know what you're arguing from. And what are you assuming the assembly line is doing with this mechanical energy? If we're assuming relatively simple uses, even outside of the assembly line (conveyors, millstones, etc.), then the transfer of mechanical energy is a non-issue (you're replacing the water wheel/windmill with skeletons.) The more complex you get, the more this jump would be needed from that point. But if you're getting to more complex uses, whose to say advancement isn't being made in those realms? We're not limited to eternal dark ages, here (which I've always found one of the more difficult to believe worldstates in fantasy without some good reason given for it.).

What I was doing before was questioning your premise. You posed that the issue is in the transfer. I was addressing as many ways this would be an issue as I was capable of seeing, and attempting to demonstrate why they were non issues. And these direct applications that you are underplaying are -still- pretty huge. It doesn't need to be hugely complex to make an impact, and each impact made can further progress as well.

EDIT: Kitkat, what is evil about that is that you are using water. Just have the skeletons turn the turbine themselves! [/kidding]

randomhero00
2011-01-26, 01:33 PM
I think the best explanation of this that I've seen was done by Lysander, in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151033). Go read it, it's REALLY good and has great RP potential. (It starts from the theory that negative energy is actually a lack of life energy, and runs from there.)

My problem with that idea is that negative is well, vacuum like. Aka lack of something. So how are you powering something with a lack of something? It doesn't make logical sense.

Oh and the reason I know it doesn't work is there aren't any perpetual motion machines in D&D.

El Dorado
2011-01-26, 01:47 PM
Undead labor can be seen in the movie Cast a Deadly Spell. I highly recommend watching it if you ever get the chance.

Jayabalard
2011-01-26, 02:04 PM
You missed two big parts of my point: There will be less living criminals, and that even increasing the cost of crime prevention, the cost of living will still be down overall.No, I disagree with the first point; I'm pretty sure I've mentioned that several times.

And really I find no basis of support for your claimed cost of living decrease; nor do I see how it has any relevance.


You mean we've got infinite energy, everyone is a criminal with equal access to said infinite energy, and anyone can become a crime boss with light effort? That's...not what industrialization has done as far as I'm aware. edit: discussing that in much detail is likely to be a bit on the political side for these fora... I'll just leave it that I see a very close relationship between industrialization and the urbanization of organized crime.


That isn't the position posed. Undead are: affordable. Affordable for this doesn't mean cheap. Joe Dirtfarmer isn't going to get a skeleton. Frank Plantationowner, however, would. It says nothing about how easy to control they are at all, meaning not everyone could control them, and similarly, it doesn't mention how widely they're used as labor. We can assume they're commonplace, but we don't have to assume that every other person on the street is actually a skeleton.
the OP posits that "most people that need long term muscle-power" ... so it's talking about replacing the majoity of labor with undead. Most people include Joe Dirtfarmer, not just "the wealthy few" (ie plantation owners). So affordable does mean that Joe Dirtfarmer can afford to get himself an undead or 6 so that he doesn't have to farm dirt.


That's fine. But within the confines of my argument (aka: what I was arguing), the problems you were posing weren't relevant. It doesn't matter who I respond to if the points you were making were irrelevant to my argument.Yes... it does. If your argument is, in fact, a counter argument to someone else's claims (and it was: you responded to my post, offering a point by point counter argument) then you don't get to dictate the scenario.


And if we're focusing on non-intelligent undead, like just about everybody else in the discussion, then what you're posing doesn't work.Actually most people are positing something kind of in-between... undead that are programmable with moderately complex tasks but are still non-sapient. I don't really agree with this, so I think that (in essence) we're really discussing a slave society that's trying to pretend it's not one... but that's really a separate issue, and I didn't want to cloud the current line of discussion with that.

Anyway, on assuming non-sapient undead: Why not? Using them in this way meets the requirements of the orders you can give a D&D undead, as well as what you can order a fairly mindless undead in other fantasy.


Fine, but do the rest of us a favor and define your terms first.The OP specified D&D but also fantasy in general. I'm talking about D&D (no specific edition but colored heavily by 1e AD&D, and mostly sticking to things that are consistent across editions) but also fantasy in general since there are things that are poorly defined in D&D but have common fantasy tropes backing them.


Because if you don't at least do some of that, you can "win" any argument by changing the terms on us (which really makes the whole discussion pointless). Who's trying to win an argument? I'm just discussing possible problems in such a scenario, staying as general as possible, and then pointing out flaws in counter arguments as I see them.


Once again, intelligence as an issue. If they're intelligent enough to do an assassin plot, then they're intelligent enough to find the basic loophole (Sure, I'll assassinate him. Eventually. What'll you do, kill me again? Thanks!)This is really not the case; programmable undead could be used for this sort of thing quite easily.
"Guard this door" would cause the undead to guard the door, attacking whoever came through. The skeleton doesn't know it's an assassin rather than a guard. This is an iconic sort of instruction to give a mindless undead.
Hand the undead a bundle to carry on it's back with a sword in it and say "Carry this north and kill all redheads" ... fairly simple instructions; 7 words, which is the limit on some undead in D&D, no?
Likewise "



That premise doesn't have much support. If its cost effective to make skeletal assassins to kill a person, you may as well just do it yourself)That really depends on how much you value the risk of getting caught; I'd say that, some people would be willing to throw more than 1000 mindless undead if it meant getting someone out of the way without any risk of exposure.

But even on the smaller than mob boss scale there's room for this to work. Fred finds out that his friend Barney is sleeping with his wife; if he's vindictive enough, he might go so far as to bump them off using an undead... and if he does so, it's likely to be a hard to trace (especially if we're still dealing with a primarily cash economy). If it doesn't work, maybe he'll try again, either with another undead or himself, or maybe he'll just Divorce Wilma and be bitter about it.

I'll have to get to the rest of it later.

The Big Dice
2011-01-26, 04:36 PM
This thread really does beg for two questions to be asked.

First, what's your source of undead labour?

Second, once you have an undead labour force, why do you need living citizens? Other than to produce more raw materials to make labourers out of.

Once you head down the road of using the dead as menial labourers, you're getting into the realms of not needing the common citizen. So you'd end up with an elite served exclusively by the dead. And that elite would quite probably end up wanting to emulate those undead servitors. Just with their minds instead of without them.

So the reason why not for undead labour is, do you want to lead inevitably to a nation of undead?

ThirdEmperor
2011-01-26, 04:41 PM
Seems to me that there really wouldn't be that many problems. A literal skeleton crew would actually be faster than humans, never tire or need food, never rot, and you'd only need one supervisor to manage an entire squad of them. I can imagine the corpses for this would be acquired much like donating organs. People go in, pledge their corpse, get a little money, and when they die, they're corpse works forever for the greater good of all. I personally see no problems with this at all, assuming the soul is left undisturbed.

Ragitsu
2011-01-26, 04:50 PM
This thread really does beg for two questions to be asked.

First, what's your source of undead labour?

Second, once you have an undead labour force, why do you need living citizens? Other than to produce more raw materials to make labourers out of.

Once you head down the road of using the dead as menial labourers, you're getting into the realms of not needing the common citizen. So you'd end up with an elite served exclusively by the dead. And that elite would quite probably end up wanting to emulate those undead servitors. Just with their minds instead of without them.

So the reason why not for undead labour is, do you want to lead inevitably to a nation of undead?

There would still be jobs that require too much mental power and coordination. for mindless undead to handle.

Czin
2011-01-26, 04:52 PM
There would still be jobs that require too much mental power and coordination. for mindless undead to handle.

One could use a Crypt Thing work force (the only easily created intelligent undead who isn't evil) for any tasks that would require skilled labor thus rendering that point moot. Or perhaps you could just make use of the awaken undead spell to create some sapient skeletons.

Ragitsu
2011-01-26, 04:55 PM
One could use a Crypt Thing work force (the only easily created intelligent undead who isn't evil) for any tasks that would require skilled labor thus rendering that point moot. Or perhaps you could just make use of the awaken undead spell to create some sapient skeletons.

Which aren't as easily controlled, I think, so there goes part of the allure of using undead.

Obrysii
2011-01-26, 04:56 PM
Interesting thread.

In my D&D setting, there is a land known as "the Land of the Skeleton-Farmers" - tainted by the blood of the God of Death, this land is permeated with negative energy.

The dead rise within hours of their ends.

The great and powerful Lich King (not that one) rules from his great tower, and from his command the undead do not hurt the living.

For the most part, the undead are mindless for about a month - and then begin taking on their own personalities, their old identities. They do not tire, nor want of food or drink.

But for love of their people, they labor in the fields, in the mines, in the cities.

The police force is largely made of ghosts, and the great cities are guarded by tireless beings.

And so the land lives in peace - humanity continuing on as it usually does for the usual gains, but no longer labored in the fields they spend their time working magics, learning, building - and worshiping.

Czin
2011-01-26, 05:00 PM
Which aren't as easily controlled, I think, so there goes part of the allure of using undead.

The Sapient skeletons can be easily rebuked and controlled/remain controlled by the animate dead/command undead spell they're still generally going to be 1 hit dice creatures. You'd just use them wherever you needed skilled labor. The living would become nothing more than a source of fresh corpses to animate, so they'd just be put in pens naked (why bother to clothe them? Clothes cost money and you don't want to take more money away from the Onyx budget than you absolutely have to) under rather poor conditions to optimize the death rate without allowing it to go above the birth rate, ensuring a constant supply of corpses and given no food or water outside of what a regular casting of create food and water would give.

Asheram
2011-01-26, 05:07 PM
I don't figure anyone of you have seen the movie Fido (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0457572/)?
It's basicly about a world where All dead humans are reanimated as zombies, no matter how they die. Now, it's all up to if you want to bury your grandmother, or sell her as manual labor.
ZomCon trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz2rlszMJc8&feature=related)

Ragitsu
2011-01-26, 05:08 PM
And so the land lives in peace - humanity continuing on as it usually does for the usual gains, but no longer labored in the fields they spend their time working magics, learning, building - and worshiping.

Can you imagine what would happen if, one day, the labor force ceases to be?

Disaster!

...and a good adventure idea :smallamused:.

Obrysii
2011-01-26, 07:44 PM
...and a good adventure idea :smallamused:.

That would be a nice lower-level adventure idea.

One of the things emphasized in this land is the lawful neutralness of everything. Sure, it might use negative energy to animate a portion of its citizens, but that energy is used towards survival and not wanton destruction.

Ragitsu
2011-01-26, 10:38 PM
You could even paint skeletons, both for decoration, and to signify their appointed task(s).

Also, skeletons can be broken down, then stored in a barrel. I think you could fit at least three skeletons per barrel.

TheCountAlucard
2011-01-27, 03:50 AM
Clothes cost money and you don't want to take more money away from the Onyx budget than you absolutely have to) under rather poor conditions to optimize the death rate without allowing it to go above the birth rate, ensuring a constant supply of corpses and given no food or water outside of what a regular casting of create food and water would give.I disagree with this bit - poor treatment, starvation and the like - that's gonna result in stunted people with low ability scores. If you're REALLY gonna farm people, you'll do the best you can to make them physically-fit and have them die in the prime of their lives, so that the skeleton retains the subject's awesome ability scores, and thus can do its job more efficiently.

EDIT: I love this forum; it's made me lose a whole three points of Humanity. :smallamused:

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 04:54 AM
You could even paint skeletons, both for decoration, and to signify their appointed task(s).

Also, skeletons can be broken down, then stored in a barrel. I think you could fit at least three skeletons per barrel.
Or pull an ol' Grim Fandango, and scrimshaw, say on the forehead. In the world I am working on, the skeletons out in the open are clothed in burlap coveralls, with the head hands and feet covered.
There is a very expansionist, very smite happy, culture next door, The Imperial Republic of Valdon, they tend to object to this kind of thing.

Yahzi
2011-01-27, 07:52 AM
It's entirely reasonable to assume that undead workers would wear themselves out, eventually to the point of uselessness; and it's not a stretch to say that this might happen quite quickly, if you're working them day after day. A skeleton that just lies around for months or years, only getting up for a minute or so at a time to hack apart some level-1 adventurer, is putting in a lot less working-hours on its frame than a skeleton hacking away at a mine for 20 hours every day. Depending on that fatigue rate, one could have a world where undead really are less cost-effective as laborers than peasants or working animals.
Excellent point. Undead don't heal; mining is hard work that generates a regular supply of bruises. This means after a while your undead are just going to fall apart.

And peasants are cheap. 1 sp / day! For the price of animating a skeleton you can work a peasant for most of a year.

However, in special cases it does make sense. Turning grindstones or Skeletal horses pulling carriages makes sense (and the latter is a cool image!).

But for construction projects... get a Lyre of Building or a Mattock of the Titans.

Obrysii
2011-01-27, 08:06 AM
Excellent point. Undead don't heal; mining is hard work that generates a regular supply of bruises. This means after a while your undead are just going to fall apart.

Technically, unless they are damaged by a cave collapse or something else, Undead don't "wear out" - the negative energy that animates them always shields them from such mechanical wear-and-tear.

They cannot become fatigued or exhausted - they never suffer the penalties of constant work. Unless their animating force wears out or they take actual hit point damage, a skeleton will continue to work.

Czin
2011-01-27, 08:15 AM
I think the Libris Mortis alllows undead to regain hit points by resting for 8-24 hours much like living creatures. Though I think only intelligent Undead can do this.

TDB Lady
2011-01-27, 12:02 PM
We just had an instance of undead labor in our campaign this last Sunday.

Our party is scouting the borders and fortifications of the country just north of our own.

Over the course of the last year (game time) we have made several forays up there on various missions. We have found clear evidence that the Lich Queen that rules the country is planning to invade our country. The invasion has actually been set back a year by the efforts of ourselves and a few others who are working on damaging fortifications. We have been asked (very unofficially by the government) to continue to gather intelligence.

We are currently paralleling a road that goes between some forts and a small city. It is deep winter (think some 50" of snow) and we have been told by a gnoll we questioned after wiping out his patrol that 'clerics keep the road clear'

We can see that the road looks shoveled. One of our rangers was working point for us, and saw a sled being pulled by skeletal horses, with a tent on the back. A hobgoblin was driving it, and a crew of skeltons was shoveling the snow off the road. Evidently the tent is for the off duty shift crew to sleep in while the other cleric drives the sled and keep the skeletons working!:smalleek:

Of course, in this case, we are not too worried about the good or evil aspects of this. After all, the ruler of the country is a Lich! So we know that evil is involoved.

TDB Lady

LibraryOgre
2011-01-27, 12:41 PM
Technically, unless they are damaged by a cave collapse or something else, Undead don't "wear out" - the negative energy that animates them always shields them from such mechanical wear-and-tear.

I disagree. I think this is one of the things that the rules simply don't cover; a skeleton in constant use for years or decades would simply wear and tear out unless magically restored; an accumulation of "partial HP" of damage until they just break.

My best reference for this is Planescape: Torment, in the Mortuary... the number of undead there that have simply worn out, since are being mechanically, not magically, maintained.

Coidzor
2011-01-27, 12:52 PM
I disagree. I think this is one of the things that the rules simply don't cover; a skeleton in constant use for years or decades would simply wear and tear out unless magically restored; an accumulation of "partial HP" of damage until they just break.

My best reference for this is Planescape: Torment, in the Mortuary... the number of undead there that have simply worn out, since are being mechanically, not magically, maintained.

Exactly, they don't unless it's necessary to set up some aesthetic for the story they're in.

ThirdEmperor
2011-01-27, 01:00 PM
Plus, it's easy enough to maintain them with a few minor Inflict spells.

LibraryOgre
2011-01-27, 01:12 PM
Plus, it's easy enough to maintain them with a few minor Inflict spells.

Assuming your game of choice allows for that... and it gets a lot more complex as your number of undead goes up. Unless you're using trapcheese for minor inflicts, you've got to have a LOT of minor magicians to keep up with that.

Serenity
2011-01-27, 01:50 PM
No, it doesn't. For starters, just look at the rules for True Resurrection. You can resurrect someone whose body has been completely annihilated, but not someone whose corpse has been animated as a zombie. If True Resurrection can completely ignore anything done to your body up to and including complete annihilation, a spell that hinders it must have effects on you beyond just your corpse: in other words, on your soul.

And that's ignoring the idea that an undead is like an unshielded nuclear reactor of entropic magic.

You could just as easily argue that the spell fails because your body is still intact, so it can't use it's 'create a new body clause', but the body is 'occupied' by the Negative Energy animating it, so your soul cannot be returned there.

Obrysii
2011-01-27, 01:56 PM
I disagree. I think this is one of the things that the rules simply don't cover; a skeleton in constant use for years or decades would simply wear and tear out unless magically restored; an accumulation of "partial HP" of damage until they just break.

That's why I say "technically" ... the only other precedent I have for it would be the fact that long 'living' undead have the chance of having the Evolved template added to them - implying that their negative energy connection is such that it negates all of the wear and tear associated with long unlife.

Czin
2011-01-27, 03:12 PM
No, it doesn't. For starters, just look at the rules for True Resurrection. You can resurrect someone whose body has been completely annihilated, but not someone whose corpse has been animated as a zombie. If True Resurrection can completely ignore anything done to your body up to and including complete annihilation, a spell that hinders it must have effects on you beyond just your corpse: in other words, on your soul.

And that's ignoring the idea that an undead is like an unshielded nuclear reactor of entropic magic.

I thought that mindless undead were automatically considered willing for the purposes of Resurrection and True Resurrection?

HenryHankovitch
2011-01-27, 03:20 PM
Technically, unless they are damaged by a cave collapse or something else, Undead don't "wear out" - the negative energy that animates them always shields them from such mechanical wear-and-tear.

They cannot become fatigued or exhausted - they never suffer the penalties of constant work. Unless their animating force wears out or they take actual hit point damage, a skeleton will continue to work.

There's no specific rule on this, which is why I made it a "reasonable assumption." There's no rule saying tools, clothing, rope etc. get damaged by use unless someone makes a Sunder attempt on them; I wouldn't rule that this meant objects in D&D never wear out from use.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 03:25 PM
There's no specific rule on this, which is why I made it a "reasonable assumption." There's no rule saying tools, clothing, rope etc. get damaged by use unless someone makes a Sunder attempt on them; I wouldn't rule that this meant objects in D&D never wear out from use.
I agree with this. Still, a self activating, like whenever the skelies pass through a certain door, item of Inflict Minor wounds should keep things dandy. Expensive to NPC, but a worthwhile investment.

ThirdEmperor
2011-01-27, 03:28 PM
Assuming your game of choice allows for that... and it gets a lot more complex as your number of undead goes up. Unless you're using trapcheese for minor inflicts, you've got to have a LOT of minor magicians to keep up with that.

Well, wands of Mass Inflict, plenty of clerics, a few higher levels. I think, assuming a certain ratio of cleric to undead, which would already be needed to manage the darn brainless things, it would be workable, and still less expensive than slaves.

Chilingsworth
2011-01-27, 03:33 PM
Well, wands of Mass Inflict, plenty of clerics, a few higher levels. I think, assuming a certain ratio of cleric to undead, which would already be needed to manage the darn brainless things, it would be workable, and still less expensive than slaves.

Inflict Light Wounds is a fifth level spell, you can't make wands of it. As Raven's Cry suggested, you could make a trap of inflict minor or light wounds, though.

EDIT: If you happen to be playing in Pathfinder, even low-level clerics could use their channel energy ability to repair large numbers of undead, as long as they channeled negative energy, of course.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 03:35 PM
Well, wands of Mass Inflict, plenty of clerics, a few higher levels. I think, assuming a certain ratio of cleric to undead, which would already be needed to manage the darn brainless things, it would be workable, and still less expensive than slaves.
Indeed. And less reprehensible, depending on what creating an unintelligent undead means to the souls. And considering that you can make in 3.5 unintelligent undead out of a stone to fleshed statue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/stonetoFlesh.htm) or from the results of a clone spell made on a still living subject, (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm) you technically don't even need to desecrate the dead.

Chilingsworth
2011-01-27, 03:40 PM
Indeed. And less reprehensible, depending on what creating an unintelligent undead means to the souls. And considering that you can make in 3.5 unintelligent undead out of a stone to fleshed statue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/stonetoFlesh.htm) or from the results of a clone spell made on a still living subject, (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm) you technically don't even need to desecrate the dead.

Hmm... of the two, I'd think Stone to Flesh would be the better option: Use wall of stone, then stone shape to make at least rough statues (use artisans to finish the statues if needed.) Then use Stone to Flesh to create your needed corpses. It would be cheeper than the 1,000 gp/corpse clone method.

JonestheSpy
2011-01-27, 03:53 PM
Exactly, they don't unless it's necessary to set up some aesthetic for the story they're in.

By the same logic, because there are no rules about the rate of hair growth, we can assume that everyone's hair stays exactly the same length all the time and dwarves must just be born that way. Because if hair grew in the DnD universe, someone would have put it in the rules, right?

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 03:56 PM
Hmm... of the two, I'd think Stone to Flesh would be the better option: Use wall of stone, then stone shape to make at least rough statues (use artisans to finish the statues if needed.) Then use Stone to Flesh to create your needed corpses. It would be cheeper than the 1,000 gp/corpse clone method.
Maybe, my point was, in 3.5 at least, there is no hard and fast ruling on what been an undead robot does to the soul and considering you can animate things that don't even have souls, not inconsiderable evidence against to doing more then stopping it from being reattached to a living body.

Ragitsu
2011-01-27, 04:32 PM
Is there a way to selectively flush an area with Negative Energy, that persists on a continuous basis, and be able to turn that on/off at will?

Czin
2011-01-27, 04:43 PM
Is there a way to selectively flush an area with Negative Energy, that persists on a continuous basis, and be able to turn that on/off at will?

Make a portal to a Doldrum (or whatever the manual of the planes calls those areas in the plane of shadow with a minor/major negative energy dominated trait) whenever their work is finished an commanded intelligent undead mage will teleport the plane of shadow stuff into the corresponding material plane room then take the undead out and shut the portal. Not quite you asked for, but effective nontheless.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 04:44 PM
Is there a way to selectively flush an area with Negative Energy, that persists on a continuous basis, and be able to turn that on/off at will?
It's a trap!
More to the point ,the rules for making a magical trap (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/traps.htm) would allow you to make a 'trap' that casts Mass Inflict Light Wounds periodically.

tenthousandways
2011-01-27, 05:40 PM
I'll admit, I didn't read every word in this thread; there was too much no it isn't'/yes-it-is going on. Here are my thoughts. Please forgive if I'm overly repetitive.

Assuming the morality issue is rendered nil, the only real cons are cost and yuckiness. Yuckiness can be mostly overcome by making bones-only undead (skeletons instead of zombies for d&d) and perhaps dressing them in something concealing if they're going to be around the general populace, which they shouldn't have to be anyway (see below). As far as cost goes, you're going to have to be careful to choose your undead's tasks well. You're never going to profit from hordes of skeleton street sweepers and probably not from skeleton draft horses (after all, horses make more little horses basically for free). If, however, you had select crews of undead doing unpleasant but simple tasks you might realize some benefit. If running water turning a waterwheel could do it, skeletons probably can, too.

I imagine a city whose primary resource is mining, but they don't have access to tons of running water. Living beings are in the mines, hacking out ore containing valuable minerals. Skeletons are at the surface turning cranks or walking in wheels to generate motion to power a system of switches and gears. This system of gears is gleefully run by a trio of gnomes who built the machine just to see if it could be done and don't realize they aren't getting paid enough. The machine can transfer skele-power as needed to ropes that pull up the carts full of ore, to the various mills that crush the ore, to the bellows and fuel conveyors that feed the smelters and forges, or whatever else might be needed. Additionally, the skeleton crew isn't bothered by the dust from the mine and mills or the heat of the furnaces (as long as they don't get too close).

One of the big cost factors here is the supervision and I have the answer for that as well. Since this is a prosperous city, due to their efficient extraction of resources, they have a thriving academic community (read wizard school), and where you find academia you find.... wait for it... GRADUATE STUDENTS! Yes, all graduate students of the local wizardy school have to spend a certain amount of 'volunteer' time watching the skeletons. Mostly this is boring, which allows the students to study and work on their thesis, and when the occasional mishap occurs, the grad students are just competent enough to handle it or alert someone appropriate.

Another variant of this is a situation where there is a craft going on and the crafters need manual labor and secrecy. Glassblowing requires hauling of sand and pumping of bellows, but the glassblowers might have secrets of their trade they don't trust to the 2cp per day manual labor force. Right here on good old Earth, there was a time when asian ceramic manufacture was so profitable and the secrets were guarded so closely that master ceramicists (I don't think that's a word) were kidnapped and armed skirmishes were fought over patches of riverbank that had the perfect clay. Labor that can't reveal secrets might be worth it.

Coidzor
2011-01-27, 05:41 PM
Is there a way to selectively flush an area with Negative Energy, that persists on a continuous basis, and be able to turn that on/off at will?

Black sand + conveyor belts/floors with drains/trap-doors and tilted for maximum and drainage, or have it at least drain well enough that minimal sweeping will remove the last of the black sand.

I believe Blackwater will achieve a similar effect but I don't think one can get it to exist continuously other than at the bottom of the ocean in certain places, at least, not without magical traps summoning it.

Yahzi
2011-01-27, 07:32 PM
More to the point ,the rules for making a magical trap (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/traps.htm) would allow you to make a 'trap' that casts Mass Inflict Light Wounds periodically.
But... once you've gone to the trouble of making specific magic items (or just hiring a cleric to heal your undead), you've probably already busted the cost curve vs. peasants.

The question is not "can you make undead labor," it's "can you make undead labor that's cheaper than peasants." :smallbiggrin:

Remember, this is all taking place in a medieval mindset, where a peasant is worth less than a dog. Seriously, medieval aristocrats had none of that "equality" or "one man, one vote" stuff in their heads: peasants were literally worth less to them than a good hunting dog.


Right here on good old Earth, there was a time when asian ceramic manufacture was so profitable and the secrets were guarded so closely that master ceramicists (I don't think that's a word) were kidnapped and armed skirmishes were fought over patches of riverbank that had the perfect clay.
That was a great book! Here it is: Arcanum: The Extraordinary True Story (http://www.amazon.com/Arcanum-Extraordinary-True-Story/dp/0446524999)

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 07:43 PM
But... once you've gone to the trouble of making specific magic items (or just hiring a cleric to heal your undead), you've probably already busted the cost curve vs. peasants.

The question is not "can you make undead labor," it's "can you make undead labor that's cheaper than peasants." :smallbiggrin:

Investment my dear, investment. Sure, it has a large start up costs, but once you're done you have a labour force that, while only able to do simple tasks, is able to do them indefinitely. Or you can just give them back to their kin for burial when they wear out. It really depends on the population, large population means many deaths, and the (DM ruling) on how fast they wear out.

Tetsubo 57
2011-01-27, 07:45 PM
I've always thought that the evil descriptor should only apply when used to create intelligent undead. Skeletons & zombies have no more moral content than animating a chair. Negative energy is not evil. The negative plane has no alignment component. Why should a skeleton or zombie be evil? A corpse is a thing, not a person.

I have used animated dead as work forces in an old 2E campaign. They would 'walk the wheel' to generate rotary power. Used mostly for pumping water 24/7. I also had an Isle of the Dead ruled by an neutral lich and populated by his undead workers that ran the world's largest plantation. He had very low overhead.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 07:51 PM
I've always thought that the evil descriptor should only apply when used to create intelligent undead. Skeletons & zombies have no more moral content than animating a chair. Negative energy is not evil. The negative plane has no alignment component. Why should a skeleton or zombie be evil? A corpse is a thing, not a person.

I have used animated dead as work forces in an old 2E campaign. They would 'walk the wheel' to generate rotary power. Used mostly for pumping water 24/7. I also had an Isle of the Dead ruled by an neutral lich and populated by his undead workers that ran the world's largest plantation. He had very low overhead.
I houserule that Unintelligent Undead have the alignment of the person controlling them at the time. They are tools, no more, no less. Of course, there may be social mores against desecrating the dead, but that is a fun source of role play conflict.

Ragitsu
2011-01-27, 08:15 PM
Skeleton horses = lots of motive power.

Skeleton oxen remove the need for feed, that would otherwise go to live oxen.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 08:26 PM
Skeleton horses = lots of motive power.

Skeleton oxen remove the need for feed, that would otherwise go to live oxen.
Troll arms in a row pulling up and down on a crankshaft=engine. Yes, I know it doesn't work by RAW. It's still awesome though.

Coidzor
2011-01-27, 08:35 PM
If one wants to get really elaborate, one can have a haunt shifted porpoise possess some object and harness that 80' swim speed on some kinda turbine in water. Or any sort of fast move speed critter haunt shifted into the turbine itself... or a component that can be installed into the turbine anyway.

Does away with the maintenance of the undeads' bodies of flesh and/or bone and instead makes it into maintenance of things of metal and stone and wood.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-27, 09:06 PM
You're not culling horses for your skeleton workforce(unless they were suffering some incurable disease already), you're re-animating those horses that just plain died(or were over-worked to death).

As for the wear and tear, Corpsecrafter with the "Negative Energy Explosion" boost. Assuming that the citizenry understands that it's less land-intensive than burial, and less pollutive/disgusting than breathing cremation smoke, nobody would care too much if skeletons that went pop in the mines/power plants were unable to be Resurrected. Yes, I realise we might have some Undead wandering the streets for various uses. Again, we just shift them to the non-populated areas when they're low on HP. Or we just acquired some Wights(then we'd need to summon the local Priest for stuff). Corpse Crafter+Desecrate is a good idea anyway, to give you even stronger/tougher skeletons.:smallcool:

Ragitsu
2011-01-27, 09:13 PM
Wear-and-tear's a bit of a funny issue.

BODIES and INANIMATE skeletons can be worn down, but do magically animated bodies and skeletons "normally" wear down?

I'm guessing this strictly depends on the peculiarities of one's campaign/game setting.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 09:24 PM
Wear-and-tear's a bit of a funny issue.

BODIES and INANIMATE skeletons can be worn down, but do magically animated bodies and skeletons "normally" wear down?

I'm guessing this strictly depends on the peculiarities of one's campaign/game setting.
It is one of those things the rules don't cover, and why I love pen and paper role playing games. The designers probably didn't consider economies based on necrolurgical engineering, yet we can have it. And if you want to add a wear and tear limit, go right ahead.
Rule 0, best rule ever.

The Big Dice
2011-01-27, 10:17 PM
Wear-and-tear's a bit of a funny issue.

BODIES and INANIMATE skeletons can be worn down, but do magically animated bodies and skeletons "normally" wear down?

I'm guessing this strictly depends on the peculiarities of one's campaign/game setting.

They can certainly be damaged and if you're using them for menial and heavy tasks, they are going to get damaged and destroyed from time to time. More often if they're being used as lumberjacks, miners and the like than if they're used to weed the flowerbeds.

But the real issue remains, what is your source of fresh corpses to make these undead from? Natural deaths aren't going to be enough of a supply. Maimed and mutilated bodies fromconflicts aren't going to be suitable. You'd need some pretty harsh laws to get a decent supply from executions.

Setting up and maintaining your workforce is pretty much going to mean the mass slaughter of the existing, living workforce. And then keeping a relatively smal population of people for breeding purposes, with the express intent of turning them into undead slaves as soon as they are either big and strong enough, or they are needed to replace damaged workers.

Which to be fair, is an awesome idea for a Evil Empire.

Ragitsu
2011-01-27, 10:29 PM
But the real issue remains, what is your source of fresh corpses to make these undead from? Natural deaths aren't going to be enough of a supply. Maimed and mutilated bodies fromconflicts aren't going to be suitable. You'd need some pretty harsh laws to get a decent supply from executions.

Use animals as well. They're always breeding, and always dying, too.

Ravens_cry
2011-01-27, 10:34 PM
They can certainly be damaged and if you're using them for menial and heavy tasks, they are going to get damaged and destroyed from time to time. More often if they're being used as lumberjacks, miners and the like than if they're used to weed the flowerbeds.

But the real issue remains, what is your source of fresh corpses to make these undead from? Natural deaths aren't going to be enough of a supply. Maimed and mutilated bodies fromconflicts aren't going to be suitable. You'd need some pretty harsh laws to get a decent supply from executions.

That's why I made Necropolis a Necropolis, by ancient treaties people bring their dead to them. Also ,the dead from wars only have to be MOSTLY intact. A little plaster, a little wiring, and voilą, good as new.

Coidzor
2011-01-27, 11:10 PM
Maimed and mutilated bodies from conflicts aren't going to be suitable.

:smallconfused: Only if your enemies have time to purposely desecrate the battlefield before you can claim the corpses. Which if they have that much time, one likely lost the battle anyway and wouldn't have access to said corpses.

After all, just sticking metal in someone until they die doesn't invalidate the corpses adventurers make from being targets for animate dead.

Yahzi
2011-01-28, 05:12 AM
Sure, it has a large start up costs, but once you're done...
Hang on. You know what happens to large empires built on evil magic artifacts?

Adventurers happen.

You'll never get 40 years to amortize those costs. :smallbiggrin:

Ravens_cry
2011-01-28, 05:32 AM
Hang on. You know what happens to large empires built on evil magic artifacts?

Adventurers happen.

You'll never get 40 years to amortize those costs. :smallbiggrin:
Well yeah, but you what also happens when you have a combination of cheaper basic goods and even luxuries and a cultural incentive to create individual works of worth?
Progress happens.
Don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

Czin
2011-01-28, 05:37 AM
Well yeah, but you what also happens when you have a combination of cheaper basic goods and even luxuries and a cultural incentive to create individual works of worth?
Progress happens.
Don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

Then someone else goes and designs a construct nation...and you know what that means...

It'll time for a Robots vs Zombies war. :smallcool:

Ravens_cry
2011-01-28, 05:42 AM
Then someone else goes and designs a construct nation...and you know what that means...

It'll time for a Robots vs Zombies war. :smallcool:
The spells that empower basic constructs (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/animateObjects.htm) are significantly higher level then the ones that animate the dead (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/animatedead.htm). Still, I agree this would be more or less awesome.

The Big Dice
2011-01-28, 08:11 AM
:smallconfused: Only if your enemies have time to purposely desecrate the battlefield before you can claim the corpses. Which if they have that much time, one likely lost the battle anyway and wouldn't have access to said corpses.

After all, just sticking metal in someone until they die doesn't invalidate the corpses adventurers make from being targets for animate dead.

Killing someone with sword, axe and mace isn't just "sticking metal in them until they die" or anything else clean and nice. It's smashed bone and hacked limbs. And in a medieval war, most of your casualties come from infection rather than fighting. And in terms of numbers, it's rare for entire armies to be wiped out. More often than not they take casualties that would seem extremely low to your modern gamer, then rout.

Acanous
2011-01-28, 08:18 AM
the origin of the term "Decimate" is literally "To lose one tenth of one's fighting force".

Decimation was a huge deal, a major loss and phyrric victory if you DID pull a win.

Of course, this is why undead make good troops- they don't care that 400 just died, the rest of the 3600 are still going to try to kill you.

The Big Dice
2011-01-28, 09:42 AM
the origin of the term "Decimate" is literally "To lose one tenth of one's fighting force".

Decimation was a huge deal, a major loss and phyrric victory if you DID pull a win.

Of course, this is why undead make good troops- they don't care that 400 just died, the rest of the 3600 are still going to try to kill you.

Actually, it was a punishment the Roman Legions used from time to time. They'd have one in ten men step forwards, then the other nine in ten would kill them. It was used as a punishment for treason or mutiny.

Of course, a major problem with mindless undead troops is, you tell them to march east. So they keep going east, regardless of terrain or other problems that might come up. Some of them might get swept away by rivers, others walk off a cliff. The level of micromanagement they need is a potential pitfall.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-28, 10:56 AM
What happens when bones break down? We start using Sovereign Glue on parts! That's not Uncle Bob's skeleton, that's Uncle Bob's skull, on Aunt Martha's torso, on Cousin Ben's legs, with Brother-in-law Jack's arms!:smallcool:

Czin
2011-01-28, 11:23 AM
What happens when bones break down? We start using Sovereign Glue on parts! That's not Uncle Bob's skeleton, that's Uncle Bob's skull, on Aunt Martha's torso, on Cousin Ben's legs, with Brother-in-law Jack's arms!:smallcool:

I can hear the self-righteous good aligned adventuring parties fuming from here.

But seriously, Nation that is run by Construct labor vs Nation that is run by Undead labor. We need to make this happen man! I want to see Iron Golems and Nightwalkers duking it out! I want to see Hill Giant Zombies fighting Flesh Golems! I want to see clockwork horrors clashing with mobs of ghouls!

Coidzor
2011-01-28, 12:41 PM
Killing someone with sword, axe and mace isn't just "sticking metal in them until they die" or anything else clean and nice. It's smashed bone and hacked limbs. And in a medieval war, most of your casualties come from infection rather than fighting. And in terms of numbers, it's rare for entire armies to be wiped out. More often than not they take casualties that would seem extremely low to your modern gamer, then rout.

Then you're making it so that the spell is useless in an actual game to players playing as adventurers with that restriction.

The Big Dice
2011-01-28, 12:45 PM
Then you're making it so that the spell is useless in an actual game to players playing as adventurers with that restriction.

No, I'm pointing out flaws in raising hordes of undead from conventional battlefields. Sure, you'd get some useable corpses, but not as many as you might think. Spells like Cloudkill are going to get you more useful raw material. But in general, if you want to make an undead labour force, you'd be better off killing your civillian population off.

And if you did that, you'd only need enough rotters to produce food, raw materials and so on to service a much reduced population.

Ragitsu
2011-01-28, 04:28 PM
Wait a second.

Since skeletons are just as strong as the average man, but take up less space and weigh less, couldn't you squeeze together two or three of them, getting a single skeleton only slightly bulkier than the average man, but two or three times as strong?

Czin
2011-01-28, 04:31 PM
Wait a second.

Since skeletons are just as strong as the average man, but take up less space and weigh less, couldn't you squeeze together two or three of them, getting a single skeleton only slightly bulkier than the average man, but two or three times as strong?

No, that wouldn't work by RAW, nor does it sound like it makes much sense. Plus 3 one hit dice str 10 characters =/= 1 three hit dice str 30 character. The 3 hit dice Str 30 character would nearly always blow away the 3 one hit dice str 10 characters if the rest of their stats were equal.

Ragitsu
2011-01-28, 06:26 PM
nor does it sound like it makes much sense.

Why?


The 3 hit dice Str 30 character would nearly always blow away the 3 one hit dice str 10 characters if the rest of their stats were equal.

In this case, you'd be synchronizing them together.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-29, 12:37 PM
No, that wouldn't work by RAW, nor does it sound like it makes much sense. Plus 3 one hit dice str 10 characters =/= 1 three hit dice str 30 character. The 3 hit dice Str 30 character would nearly always blow away the 3 one hit dice str 10 characters if the rest of their stats were equal.

This is why you Sovereign Glue all those bones together!:smallbiggrin:

1 Femur (thighbone) is easy to break(not in real life, but let's just follow the metaphor).
3 Femurs in a prismatic formation is much harder to break. You'd stuff slightly smaller skulls inside slightly larger ones, glue long bones alongside other long bones, brace the larger rib cage with smaller ribs along the inside, etc.

Sovereign Glue: The ultimate solution to all your necromantic issues!:smallwink:

Melayl
2011-01-29, 02:55 PM
One of the kingdoms I'm designing for my homebrew world does indeed use udead labor for some tasks. It is a theocracy that worships a sun/moon combo of deities. Undead are under the purview of the moon deity, and it is considered an honor to be raised as an undead to continue serving your god and your people. Those worshipping the sun deity aren't brought back to serve, though.

The undead (mostly skeletons) are used mainly for pulling carts/plows/etc and turning wheels/pumps/etc. This allows work to be done 24/7 on farms, in factories, etc. The economy and living conditions in the theocracy are higher because of it.

Ragitsu
2011-01-29, 07:48 PM
This is why you Sovereign Glue all those bones together!:smallbiggrin:

1 Femur (thighbone) is easy to break(not in real life, but let's just follow the metaphor).
3 Femurs in a prismatic formation is much harder to break. You'd stuff slightly smaller skulls inside slightly larger ones, glue long bones alongside other long bones, brace the larger rib cage with smaller ribs along the inside, etc.

Sovereign Glue: The ultimate solution to all your necromantic issues!:smallwink:

GENIUS idea :smallsmile:!