Why won't love potions work on ghouls? A discussion on the immunities of the undead.

[frogglesmash]

So the basic premise of this thread is to brain storm ways to explain why the undead would be immune to mind-affecting effects in any given campaign setting, not to to explain why wizards of the coast thought it would be a good idea, because that boils down to it being a mistake, arbitrary, or an effort to prevent mind mages from making necromancers redundant.

EDIT: My best theory to date. All living things are powered by a combination of negative and positive energy, this means that any sort of energy in a living, up to and including its thoughts, creatures body runs in a sort of binary code. Enchantment spells interface with the minds of living creatures using this and then subsequently edit it / read it / encrypt it etc. Undead on the other hand (as well as deathless) run only on one type of energy so instead of being programed with ones and zeros are are using just ones that have been forced to through arcane/divine magic to behave like ones and zeros thus making it impossible for standard min-affecting spells to work on them. This idea breaks down when the plant type comes into the picture, but I feel more comfortable homebrewing the ability away from plants rather than undead.

[Silva Stormrage]

The "Logic" seems straight forward to me anyway. They don't have functioning brains, so if the spell works by messing with them on the biological level then they should be immune. But then again if that is the case then so should a lot of others such as Elementals.

"Its Magic" also seems like a cop out answer.

[OldTrees1]

I don't know. Obviously they are not immune to all forms of mental control since that is how necromancers control them. Likewise their rotted brains are likely to not be the source of their minds or at least not in the same way as living creatures. So while I would expect them to be resistant to mind effecting effects and affecting one would require some level of training to learn how the undead mind worked, I would not expect a flat immunity. Yet Constructs have a similar mind divergence from the norm and have a similar immunity to mind effecting effects. Could it be that non necromancers have been lax in their science and just not discovered how to enchant abnormal minds?

[frogglesmash]

The "Logic" seems straight forward to me anyway. They don't have functioning brains, so if the spell works by messing with them on the biological level then they should be immune. But then again if that is the case then so should a lot of others such as Elementals.

"Its Magic" also seems like a cop out answer.

The first one often comes up in these types of threads, but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny, I don't think because magic works either because a) its lazy and b) it provides no real explanation. The other common thing I noticed about these threads is how elementals and plants tend to break most explanations people come up with.

[Nibbens]

The "Logic" seems straight forward to me anyway. They don't have functioning brains, so if the spell works by messing with them on the biological level then they should be immune. But then again if that is the case then so should a lot of others such as Elementals.

"Its Magic" also seems like a cop out answer.

But "Intelligent" undead may not have a working brain, but they have a consciousness, which seems to argue with the fact that they don't have a functioning brain. It may not be "functioning" in the biological sense, but in the essence, there is no doubt.

And the cop out "It's magic" could work against this argument in the case of intelligent undead... There are tons of "consciousness" altering spells - which may or may not be synonymous with mind altering...

...
...
...What the heck was I talking about again? lol.

[atemu1234]

It'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'sm agicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagici t'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'sma gicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit 'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smag icit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit' smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagi cit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit's magicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagic It'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'sm agicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagici t'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'sma gicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit 'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smag icit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit' smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagi cit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit's magicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagic It'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'sm agicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagici t'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'sma gicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit 'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smag icit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit' smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagi cit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit's magicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagic It'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'sm agicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagici t'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'sma gicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit 'smagicit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smag icit'smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit' smagicit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagi cit'smagicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit's magicIt'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagic

[OldTrees1]

It'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagicit'smagic -snip-
It's comments like these that have held back wizard's science innovations. No wonder the enchanters have not figured out how to charm trees.

[frogglesmash]

I don't know. Obviously they are not immune to all forms of mental control since that is how necromancers control them. Likewise their rotted brains are likely to not be the source of their minds or at least not in the same way as living creatures. So while I would expect them to be resistant to mind effecting effects and affecting one would require some level of training to learn how the undead mind worked, I would not expect a flat immunity. Yet Constructs have a similar mind divergence from the norm and have a similar immunity to mind effecting effects. Could it be that non necromancers have been lax in their science and just not discovered how to enchant abnormal minds?

The undead-specific, control spells can be rationalized as working on similar principles than a cleric's control undead ability. Constructs are somewhat harder to explain, though I guess you could say that even highly intelligent constructs do not have a true "mind," but are instead the result of highly advanced wizard programing.

Another interesting question is how do souls and undead work? For some it's obvious i.e. lich's keep it in their phylactery, skeletons don't have one, but for others like ghouls it gets weird.
Since they're intelligent and presumably retain memories of their past life it's safe to assume that their soul resides in their body, especially if created by another ghoul, but what happens if a necromancer creates a ghoul using a corpse who's been dead for several millennia, and who's soul has become a part of whatever plane of existence the went to for their after life? Nothing says that this prevents the spell from working. What if the the soul's been destroyed before hand? By RAW the animation once again, still works. Does this mean the ghoul just gets some random soul shoved into it? If that's case who's memories does it have? the body's or the souls?

[frogglesmash]

It's comments like these that have held back wizard's science innovations. No wonder the enchanters have not figured out how to charm trees.

The real question is how do you know if the tree has been successfully charmed or not?

[OldTrees1]

The undead-specific, control spells can be rationalized as working on similar principles than a cleric's control undead ability. Constructs are somewhat harder to explain, though I guess you could say that even highly intelligent constructs do not have a true "mind," but are instead the result of highly advanced wizard programing.

Another interesting question is how do souls and undead work? For some it's obvious i.e. lich's keep it in their phylactery, skeletons don't have one, but for others like ghouls it gets weird.
Since they're intelligent and presumably retain memories of their past life it's safe to assume that their soul resides in their body, especially if created by another ghoul, but what happens if a necromancer creates a ghoul using a corpse who's been dead for several millennia, and who's soul has become a part of whatever plane of existence the went to for their after life? Nothing says that this prevents the spell from working. What if the the soul's been destroyed before hand? By RAW the animation once again, still works. Does this mean the ghoul just gets some random soul shoved into it? If that's case who's memories does it have? the body's or the souls?
I don't know why not having a "True Mind" would matter for enchantment. A program should be readily controllable.


Undead and souls is rather easily explained. You have the 3 kinds of undead:
The unsouled(The Zombie) is just a negative energy construct
The transformed soul (The Lich) is a negative energy construct that houses a once living soul
The new soul (The Ghoul) is a negative energy construct that is born with a new soul

Both unsouled undead and new soul undead prevent Resurrection by inhabiting the body of the dead person. Even True Resurrection gets confused since there is already a body elsewhere for the desired soul but there is not room to put the desired soul in its body.



The real question is how do you know if the tree has been successfully charmed or not?

Fair point, I'll give them a pass on that. But they are still lazy in their pursuit of a charm Treant spell.

[Nibbens]

It's comments like these that have held back wizard's science innovations. No wonder the enchanters have not figured out how to charm trees.

But they did! (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/controlPlants.html#control-plants) - except not enchanters. Druids and Sorcs of the Verdant bloodline. lol.

[OldTrees1]

But they did! (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/controlPlants.html#control-plants) - except not enchanters. Druids and Sorcs of the Verdant bloodline. lol.

Nice find!
So it is becoming increasingly evident that something is stifling innovations in wizardry. I smell a conspiracy. Or is that just the rotting flesh?

[frogglesmash]

Nice find!
So it is becoming increasingly evident that something is stifling innovations in wizardry. I smell a conspiracy. Or is that just the rotting flesh?

My guess is other wizards.

[atemu1234]

Nice find!
So it is becoming increasingly evident that something is stifling innovations in wizardry. I smell a conspiracy. Or is that just the rotting flesh?

To be fair, it does progress... if you're a Spell to Power Erudite.

Combine that with Pathfinder and you get.... I'm very excited now.

[Silva Stormrage]

Ya obviously undead aren't immune to ALL forms of mental control. Command Undead exists. I just always figured it required a specific kind of mental control, such as needing charm monster to charm outsiders instead of just charm person for everything. There is a feat that lets you use mind affecting spells on undead so /shrug.

[Psyren]

The first one often comes up in these types of threads, but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny, I don't think because magic works either because a) its lazy and b) it provides no real explanation. The other common thing I noticed about these threads is how elementals and plants tend to break most explanations people come up with.

Plants are immune to mind-affecting.

Elementals perhaps should be as well, but that actually means it's elementals running around with bad crunch, not undead.

[jiriku]

Creatures immune to mind-affecting: vermin, swarms, undead, constructs, plants, oozes.
Creatures that do not have a meat-brain in the traditional sense: vermin, swarms, undead, constructs, plants, oozes.
Therefore, we define the school of Enchantment as "spells which modify the functioning of creatures that have a meat-brain in the traditional sense".

Elementals and plants are borderline cases, but can be explained by assuming that elementals have a fairly traditional internal anatomy (made from exotic materials) and plants do not.
We note that vermin that are not mindless (and swarms that possess a hive mind) could be described as possessing a meat-brain, and are not immune to mind-affecting spells. This validates our definition.

[frogglesmash]

Plants are immune to mind-affecting.

Elementals perhaps should be as well, but that actually means it's elementals running around with bad crunch, not undead.

That's the problem whenever the argument relies on physiology elementals come along to ruin things, and if it's about undeath vs true life, then you've got the plants throwing a wrench in the works. At least constructs have absolutely zero connection to life and death, thus making them slightly easier to explain.

[Necroticplague]

Undead are immune to mind effecting because their physical minds don't control their body anymore. Their 'mind' is an unusual energy construct, completely unrelated to any physical structure in their body. That's why Constructs are also immune to mind-effecting. Plants don't really have a mind to effect, even the intelligent ones, due to their anatomy.

That's also why specific spells exist that do let you control these creature, and why they aren't Enchantment, because they need different methods to manipulate. Plants need you to manipulate their body to control their actions, thus why Control Plants is Transmutation. Undead have minds that are composed of negative energy, so controlling them requires manipulation of negative energy (Either Rebuke Undead, which channels negative energy, or Control Undead, a necromancy (school related to manipulation of negative energy) spell).

[Jurai]

It used to be that thought was thought to be in the heart, not the mind. Since the hearts of the undead don't typically beat (bar sickening imagery), it can therefore be assumed that whatever powers the elixir of love or other mind-affecting abilities targets the heart of the matter.

[Psyren]

That's the problem whenever the argument relies on physiology elementals come along to ruin things, and if it's about undeath vs true life, then you've got the plants throwing a wrench in the works. At least constructs have absolutely zero connection to life and death, thus making them slightly easier to explain.

How are plants not "true life?" They have Con scores, they are alive. They are not like undead in any sense of the word.

For Elementals, it's easily hand-waved - like Outsiders, they are composed of the fabric of their planes (just inner instead of outer), and like Outsiders, that fabric/structure approximates a "mind" to enough of a degree that those spells work on them. (At least, the more powerful versions like Charm Monster instead of Charm Person do.) Pathfinder even went all the way and did made them all Outsiders.

[frogglesmash]

Creatures immune to mind-affecting: vermin, swarms, undead, constructs, plants, oozes.
Creatures that do not have a meat-brain in the traditional sense: vermin, swarms, undead, constructs, plants, oozes.
Therefore, we define the school of Enchantment as "spells which modify the functioning of creatures that have a meat-brain in the traditional sense".

Elementals and plants are borderline cases, but can be explained by assuming that elementals have a fairly traditional internal anatomy (made from exotic materials) and plants do not.
We note that vermin that are not mindless (and swarms that possess a hive mind) could be described as possessing a meat-brain, and are not immune to mind-affecting spells. This validates our definition.

1.Swarm is a subtype therefore a swarm of spiders has the type vermin(swarm) granting it all the vermin traits as well as swarm traits.

2.Oozes' mind-affecting immunity is worded as follows:"Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects)." This combined with this disclaimer at the beginning of the ooze type description:"An ooze possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). mean that any ooze with an intelligence score lose their mindless trait and become vulnerable to the effects in question

3. Vermine are in fact, mindless and as far as I am aware there are no exceptions.

4.Plants have a far more traditional traditional biology than elementals (real world plant cells can and do behave in a way that is reminiscent to the way neurons fire.) and are thus far more likely to have a proper nervous system, especially when we compare them to say, a fire elemental; a creature made up of nothing more then light, heat, and sound.

5. The "meat brain" theory really breaks down when we look at something like the spectral lurker, a living, incorporeal (not ethereal) aberration. A creature that strait up, does not have a physiology, yet is still alive and still has a mind.

[Flickerdart]

2.Oozes' mind-affecting immunity is worded as follows:"Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects)." This combined with this disclaimer at the beginning of the ooze type description:"An ooze possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). mean that any ooze with an intelligence score lose their mindless trait and become vulnerable to the effects in question
This doesn't follow - the entire feature is not "otherwise noted" so the ooze still possesses the Mindless trait. It just happens to override the "no Intelligence score" part.

[frogglesmash]

Undead are immune to mind effecting because their physical minds don't control their body anymore. Their 'mind' is an unusual energy construct, completely unrelated to any physical structure in their body. That's why Constructs are also immune to mind-effecting. Plants don't really have a mind to effect, even the intelligent ones, due to their anatomy.

That's also why specific spells exist that do let you control these creature, and why they aren't Enchantment, because they need different methods to manipulate. Plants need you to manipulate their body to control their actions, thus why Control Plants is Transmutation. Undead have minds that are composed of negative energy, so controlling them requires manipulation of negative energy (Either Rebuke Undead, which channels negative energy, or Control Undead, a necromancy (school related to manipulation of negative energy) spell).
The physical mind doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, especially when we consider look at creatures that are susceptible to these spells, but don't actually have a physical body i.e. various elementals, who follow none of the norms for living physiology.

[frogglesmash]

This doesn't follow - the entire feature is not "otherwise noted" so the ooze still possesses the Mindless trait. It just happens to override the "no Intelligence score" part.

Are you trying to claim that a creature can be mindless yet still have a mind? Because if you can properly support that it would explain why constructs, undead, and plants are immune to mind-affecting effects.

[Fitz10019]

How does Bane know who your enemies are? How does Bless know who your allies are? How does Speak with Animals know the language of ev'ry fickin' creature on the Gods' green Oerth?

Magic knows because Magic and Knowledge are two sides of the same coin.

So, constructs and undead know what they know, sense what they sense, because Magic is their sensory organ.

If you're with me so far, take one more step and realize that Magic knows an enchantment when it sees one. Magic the Sensory Organ says to the zombie, "and on your left is a tasty-brained adventurer sweating behind an illusion of a grandfather clock."

[atemu1234]

Undead are immune to mind effecting because their physical minds don't control their body anymore. Their 'mind' is an unusual energy construct, completely unrelated to any physical structure in their body. That's why Constructs are also immune to mind-effecting. Plants don't really have a mind to effect, even the intelligent ones, due to their anatomy.

That's also why specific spells exist that do let you control these creature, and why they aren't Enchantment, because they need different methods to manipulate. Plants need you to manipulate their body to control their actions, thus why Control Plants is Transmutation. Undead have minds that are composed of negative energy, so controlling them requires manipulation of negative energy (Either Rebuke Undead, which channels negative energy, or Control Undead, a necromancy (school related to manipulation of negative energy) spell).
The physical mind doesn't really hold up to scrutiny, especially when we consider look at creatures that are susceptible to these spells, but don't actually have a physical body i.e. various elementals, who follow none of the norms for living physiology.

Sorry, just for the quote tags.

[frogglesmash]

How does Bane know who your enemies are? How does Bless know who your allies are? How does Speak with Animals know the language of ev'ry fickin' creature on the Gods' green Oerth?

Magic knows because Magic and Knowledge are two sides of the same coin.

So, constructs and undead know what they know, sense what they sense, because Magic is their sensory organ.

If you're with me so far, take one more step and realize that Magic knows an enchantment when it sees one. Magic the Sensory Organ says to the zombie, "and on your left is a tasty-brained adventurer sweating behind an illusion of a grandfather clock."

Then why don't vampires go blind in antimagic zones?

Edit: I'd also like to add that most spells are directed by the casters intent.

[atemu1234]

Then why don't vampires go blind in antimagic zones?

D&D is an excercise in Doublethink, apparently.

[frogglesmash]

D&D is an excercise in Doublethink, apparently.

It seems to me that rationalising d&d rules can spawn a lot of interesting hypotheses., none of which are anywhere near watertight.

[Flickerdart]

Are you trying to claim that a creature can be mindless yet still have a mind? Because if you can properly support that it would explain why constructs, undead, and plants are immune to mind-affecting effects.
"Mindless" is just the name of the ability. You could call it "fluffernuffles" for all that the name matters. The actual mindlessness is derived from the "no Intelligence score" portion, and what that means is explained in the Nonabilities section of the rules.

[frogglesmash]

Well yes, by a super strict RAW interpretation, but I think it's pretty clear what the RAI interpretation is here and I think that since this thread is being discussed from more of a world building standpoint than a character optimization standpoint it would be appropriate to use the RAI interpretation. Though as I said before, rationalizing the RAW interpretation would make things a lot simpler.

[Psyren]

3. Vermine are in fact, mindless and as far as I am aware there are no exceptions.

He said the intelligent ones aren't, and he's right - if a vermin gains intelligence (e.g. a vermin animal companion or familiar) it loses the "mindless" trait.

[Jowgen]

I think the meat-brain approach can be disproved by the fact that undead in general don't die from having their heads removed. I believe the real answer lies in the negative energy nature of undead. First, here is my personal fluff-explanation for how undead-ness works in and off itself. After that, I'll go into how it explains the immunities.

The magic-science of undead.

Positive energy is a manifestation of the cosmic principle of growth while negative energy is a manifestation of the cosmic principle of decay. As growth is a vital aspect of living existence, all living things have a bit of positive energy as a part of their being (not just physiology, but the whole pseudo-science shabang) and can draw a number of benefits from it (e.g. healing). When a living thing dies, its growth stops and thus the positve energy ceases. If that dead creature is infused with negative energy, that negative energy naturally flows into the places where the positive energy used to be (an "imprint" of sorts) and brings some parts of its "system online" again. Think of it as a drug mimicking the effect of a naturally neurotransmitter, except that it can spread further to compensate for missing elements of the apparatus. The downside of this ability to "gloss over missing bits" is that a) the unused parts simply rot away and b) the creature suffers from either a limited unlife-span or the "cravings" detailed in the book of bad latin (which help balance the imperfect system).

Depending how exactly the negative energy infusion is configured, different aspects of the original living creature's existence are turned back on and potentially altered. Some examples:

- Skeleton/Zombie: The crudest level of intentional negative energy infusion. The negative energy flows into the positive energy channels that used to be part of motor-function of the living creature and spreads to furthermore compensate for the lack of actual living tissue doing its function. The dead body can move again, but that's it.

- Wight: This is the basic semi-naturally occurring form of negative energy infusion. When a creature is killed by negative energy, the negative energy aggressively takes the place of positive energy as it dies. Thanks to the pure and immediate nature of this infusion, large portions of the original system are brought back as were.

- Spawns of all varieties: Certain undead carry the configuration of their original negative energy like a source-code within their negative energy make-up. By killing another creature with their own negative energy, they impose the same configuration upon said creature, giving it the same alterations as happened to it (albeit in most cases, only for creatures that are sufficiently similar to be receptive).

-Necropolitan: This is arguably the most sophisticated form of intentional negative energy infusion. No other form of undead is capable of reactivating so many of the original creatur's systems and re-configure so many of its living parts to function almost as well with negative energy as it does with positive energy. It is a near-perfect example of substituting positive energy within a creature with negative energy.

The reason for immunity

The undead creature's physical immunities (poison, precision damage, physical ability damage) stem from two factors. First, in many cases, the undead will simply lack the physical element that a damaging effects targets (e.g. no endocrine system to be affected by a poison). Second, even if the undead has the system and uses it, any damage that is caused to it will be compensated by the negative energy. Remove the eyes of an undead that uses them to see, and the undead's negative energy will essentially replace that eye with an invisible identical eye of pure negative energy that functions the same.

In regards to mental immunities, first off, I don't think there is any mystery for non-intelligent undead. They don't have thought or will that could be affected, only the command-system within their negative energy that something with a mind can use to set commands. If the undead is intelligent, it has the ability to reason and make decisions on some level, but that "mind" is no more an actual mind as the aforementioned negative-energy-eye is an actual eyes. It is a system of negative energy that serves the same functions as a mind, but is wildly different in its composition and mechanisms. It can reason, remember things from its past (or even from its life if the undead has a soul attached), and -in some cases- even feel emotion; but it only does so because those are the functions that the actual mind of the once living creature used to have and thus left a positive energy imprint in.

One point of theoretical argument that I think interesting is what would happen if an "improved Necropolitan" of sorts were created, which uses negative energy to re-animate the creature's brain so well that this undead's mind is perfectly functionally identical to a living creatures brain, with the only difference being its use of negative rather than positive energy. If the brain were fully reanimated 1-to1, one could argue that the undead's mind would not have to rely on a negative energy mind. Would this mean the absence of a negative-energy mind and thus result in this undead being mind-affectable? Would it even count as undead, or could you actually call it a "negative energy living creature"? The Tomb-tainted soul feat suggests that this would indeed be the case. However, on the other hand, one might alternatively find that the negative energy powering the "improved necropolitan's" mind would keep it functioning the same way in the face of mind-affecting/damaging effects as it would keep its eyes functioning in the case of damage.

Ah, how I love theoretical blurred lines between life and un-life. :smallbiggrin:

So yeah, this is my take on it. :smallsmile:

[Crake]

It's easy, souls (petitioners) are immune to mind affecting, and undead are souls warped by negative energy and trapped either in some corporeal body, or in some incorporeal form. This is the same reason raise undead cant bring back someone turned into an undead, the body has too much negative charge from the undead creation process, and raise dead is not powerful enough to revert that charge. Resurrection however, being capable of curing maladies or even making a whole new body from a small portion is able to similarly remove that negative charge.

[AvatarVecna]

Short answer: it's magic.

Longer answer: Unintelligent undead aren't so much "sentient beings" as "fleshy magic robots"; they're fleshy chassis is being powered and operated by a cobbled-together, bottom-of-the-barrel, magically-created artificial intelligence, or something close enough to that functionally that the difference is mostly moot. This NegEn AI is just barely intelligent enough to tell its body to move in a particular direction and attack a particular thing. This negative energy mass isn't a standard consciousness anymore than an iPhone is (yet...); using Enchantment spells to ensnare the mind of an animated corpse is like trying to use your top-of-the-line laptop (and nothing else) to hack a mechanical lock; that laptop is a wonderful tool, and you could very well be a master of it, but it's still just a tool, and this isn't the kind of task that tool was built for. Mages who understand how undead work magically speaking can manipulate that proto-consciousness with spells, while those more familiar with divine magic (particular that of deities) have a familiarity with the positive and negative energies of the universe, and know how to magically manipulate that.

Intelligent undead are a different story, but that's my basic thoughts.