Necromancy is seen by many to be an evil, malicious force. Mages and scholars know this to be untrue, as any kind of magic can be used maliciously. Yes, the most widely known necromancers turned out to be evil, spiteful beings, but sadly, this slander has made an unlikable reputation for the necromancers of good intent. This short essay will lightly discuss the different aspects of necromancy (as innumerable tomes have been written on the subject) to prove once and for all, without a shadow of a doubt, what it truly means to use necromantic magic.
First, before one can begin to discuss of necromancy, one must understand what it takes to be a necromancer. Necromancy is the most taxing and difficult of all of the Schools of Magic. It not only requires a brilliant mind as all wizards do, but it also must require a strong will, as some more powerful necromantic secrets can only be learned by delving into the darkest and most nightmarish recesses of the living subconscious. One must take care in this, though, as sometimes the mind can go in, but it cannot come back out. Many a necromancer has been driven mad trying to unlock their inner secrets.
When looked at analytically, necromancy actually deals with the manipulations of life forces in general. Studies have shown that living beings are surrounded by an invisible energy that can only be seen by the usage of the most powerful divinations. Some realms of existence, such as the distant plane of Rokugan, as well as the warrior-monks of the world (whose philosophy, I believe, came from planes like these) call this energy ki.
Another realm I have visited, a strange realm in which carts made of metal move without beasts of burden and the inhabitants eat large, cylindrical lengths of meat encased in a long piece of bread called “hot-dogs” (another essay must be written on this marvelous realm!), calls these fields electro-magnetic fields. Whatever these fields are called, they are there. Necromancers cannot see this energy, but they can feel it (and in the words of one necromancer, they can “taste” it).
The art of necromancy is in learning how to manipulating this force. The field of energy surrounding living things has a current and flows like water in a stream. This energy originates in the abdomen, and has several areas in the body where the flow of energy is the most intense; namely the head and neck, shoulders, lower back, knees, hands, and feet. When a person becomes afflicted with a disease or illness, the flow from one area of the body to one of these focal points has been hampered in some way.
This field also has a certain vibration to it that changes from subject to subject. No two are the same, though some come close enough to be called the same by the untrained. And, when looked at by use of divination, one would see that each field has its own color, “flavor”, and intensity. People of strong constitution and physical strength typically have a field that is, fiery, strong, and somewhat dense (dense in this case meaning heavy). People of brilliant minds have a field that is bright and clear, while wise men are said to be fairly similar, though theirs is cloudy instead of clear. And people who are charismatic have a field that is flashy, intense, and sometimes overpowering.
All forms of magic involve this field in one way or another. Abjurers create wards and shields that prevent the field from being affected by harmful effects. Conjurers summon their monsters by essentially “grabbing” their summoning target by this field. Divination magic uses this field as a medium to connect to gain greater insight. Enchanters use the fields as an adhesive for their enchantments and charms to cling to. Evokers use their own fields to channel the energies they require to cast their devastating magic. Illusionists use the fields as a portrait to recreate objects and persons in their illusions. Transmuters, like necromancers, can directly manipulate this force, but instead of being able to stop its flow, absorb it, or even destroy it, they shape it to their will.
When a living entity dies, its life force leaves its material body and travels through the Astral Plane to whatever other plane the gods deem it, whether it be Celestia, Acheron, the Abyss, or even Hell. Unfortunately, some unlucky souls become trapped in the Astral Plane. When animating the dead, a necromancer opens a “gate” to the Astral Plane in order to seize one of these trapped souls. This soul is then forced into the host corpse, and that corpse becomes an undead. These methods may seem unethical in the sense that the soul is forced into the host, but one must remember that, in reality, these wandering souls are not harmed in any way. These souls are just used temporary as a means to animate the body. In essence, a transmuter or other wizard does the same thing when casting a spell of animate rope, though he doesn’t know where this animation really originates.
Once capable, a necromancer can create undead. This process is essentially the same as animating undead, except the necromancer need not a target host. Instead, a necromancer of this skill level can shape the called spirit directly and give it material form. Note that creating undead is a dangerous task, as the created undead is not under the creator’s control.
But in speaking of bestowing life to a corpse, one must also look at how to take life away from one as well. This is done in many ways, but most notably through the usage of the spell disrupt undead. Essentially, this spell performs the same actions as animate dead, only in reverse order: the spell “squeezes” the soul from the host corpse rather than forcing it in.
The Magic jar is a very peculiar spell, though very simplistic in nature. This spell’s actions are two-fold: it recreates the effects of the spells animate dead and disrupt undead. But what makes this spell unique is the fact that the target of the magic jar is the caster. The fact that the spell is able to remove the soul from a living being and actually preserve it for a small period of time is incredible. Much praise must be given to the one who devised such potent a magical spell!
Another aspect of necromancy is in its dealing with a variety of spells sometimes known as curses. These spells directly affect the energy field around the target. A curse is simply an artificial “illness” placed on a subject. In the case of the spell called bestow curse, this “illness” actually causes the energy field around the subject to temporarily diminish, effectively sapping the subject of strength and of some physical and mental abilities.
Delving into necromantic study will reveal that necromancers also have the ability to absorb the life force of a subject for their own purposes (either good or ill). This is done through spells such as energy drain, enervation, and vampiric touch. These sap the target’s life force, making them effectively weaker.
Necromancers have the power to destroy the life forces of their targets. Bear in mind that not all necromancers can do this, only the most powerful can. Possibly the most prominent spell of this kind is the finger of death. This spell attacks the field of the target, snuffing it out like a candle flame. Only the strongest of wills can survive this kind of attack. In most cases, the destruction of a life force is not a permanent thing, as the soul can be brought back.
Though most necromancers cannot do this (this is left to priests, though some necromancers learn the art of priesthood), it is possible to restore the life force of a subject who has been the target of a necromancer’s death spells. As I am not a priest, the information I possess on this subject is merely common knowledge.
I was fortunate enough to receive a copy of your unfinished article entitled "A Short Essay on Necromancy" in which you purported to explain why the use of necromancy is not "evil." (And by evil, I assume you mean that the repeated use of it should not cause a person to be revealed by the use of a spell commonly known as "detect evil".)
I have an interest in this field, and I would like to ask you a question for clarification. I presume this information would have been presented in the final, finished apologia, which I look forward to reading.
You mention that the animation of the dead is achieved by encasing a "trapped soul" into a corpse or skeletal frame. Although your essay is not clear, it appears that you believe the trapped soul is not the soul that originally inhabited the corpse or frame in life. I ask you, then, why clerics find it impossible to resurrect a person while their corpse is animated. It has been observed in numerous sources that even if the priest was to possess a piece of the corpse that had been obtained before animation, that the person's soul cannot be given a new lively body until the animated corpse has been destroyed. If, as you contend, the "soul" has departed to an Outer Plane, why is resurrection impossible.
It seems to me that it is not a random lost soul that animates the corpse, but rather the original soul, compelled to return and serve the necromancer as slave. While I am no theologian, and thus, am hesitant to claim knowledge of the strict line between that which is evil and that which is not evil, I am fairly certain that this form of post-mortem slavery falls squarely on the "evil" side of that equation.
I do not doubt that necromancy receives more criticism than it perhaps deserves. I have no idea why a necromancer who limits his practice of the dark arts to spells such as Astral Projection or False Life should be categorized by their unfortunate colleagues who are quite properly condemned for raising armies of zombies. I think careful analysis of those spells in this school by a respected ethicist or theologian is certainly warranted.
Yours truly,
Gregor Quill
Chief Sage of the Icenian Realm
Master Librarian of Occult Lore and Professor Emeritus
Royal Academy of Mystic Arts
I believe you both have been mislead as to the animating of the dead. Simple skeletons and zombies have no connection whatsoever to the soul of the original creature. Nay, merely the corpse is brought to "unlife" by the negative energies that stem from the Negative Material Plane. If a piece of the corpse was broken off, the original creature could be resurrected while the animated corpse continued.
Reports such as these do not surprise me. I have heard rumors that long ago a lich created a tome regarding undeath, some of it true and some not. As a result, fallacies it made are still being passed on.
Currently I am trying to secure more information on this subject. Good day to you both.
Sincerely,
Avash Avantis
Councilor of the Arcane Order
I appreciate the feedback on my unfinished work. I still have yet to discover the whereabouts of the alpha copy; it seems that in my professor mannerisms, I have embedded the alpha copy with powerful non-detection incantations, dweomers, and wards (being a professor of hedgewizards and young magi-to-be, my grade papers and exam answer sheets are under a constant barrage of distant scryings and divinations. I guess it has become habitual to endow all of my papers with such magic to disinterest unwanted on-lookers).
As for the animation of corpses and the like, I will try my best to answer your questions.
The body is a vessel that carries the souls of the living. When the body dies, the soul moves on. This fact has been proven time and again by priests and others with the skill and knowledge of resurrection. One must understand is that a body may only hold one soul at a time; when one analyzes the Magic Jar spell, they will see that if you force your soul into a body that already contains a soul, the original soul is forced out and into the jar. This is one of the secrets of necromancy that priests have not been able to figure out; if a necromancer can force a soul out of a body and replace it with another, why can't a priest?
Again, I haven't dabbled in the matters of the cloth, but from what I gather, the wizards have been able to crack the secrets of life. A priest's power is granted to him by his god, while a wizard's power is granted by formulation, computation, and the dissection of the natural world. Was not the first skill wizards ever mastered the power of the elements? The gods will only grant so much ability to their followers, while wizards have unlimited power at their fingertips (if worked correctly). But, alas! I begin to dabble in the great conflict or power between the cloth and the book; a battle I wish to be no part of! Before I get into any kind of trouble or make anyone angry, I will stop discussion of that matter here.
The reason why an undead entity must be destroyed in order to be resurrected is because of the simple, above-stated fact: one body, one soul. Now, while not much of a religious man, I do believe that the gods have everything planned out in advance. For priests, it is the will of the ones above as to whether the being is to be resurrected or not. Indeed, the poor souls that become trapped in the Astral Plane are hard to deal with and put back in the right body, but more than likely the god will appease the mortals below (the happier the people are, the more devoted they become).
As for whether the trapped soul is that of the original possessor or not, my studies have shown that it is not the originals soul. But how can this be? How can the trapped soul of another be used to make a dead man move? The answer to that question is very simple. The animation of a lifeless entity is akin to marionette puppetry: the inanimate object is the puppet, the wizard the puppeteer, and the soul the strings. The soul is merely the medium for the wizard to control the object. When a necromancer animates a skeleton, people get up in arms and see it as evil, while when any other wizard animates a broom, no one lifts an eye. These two actions are one in the same, but in reality, a wizard can do more evil with a broom than a necromancer can do with a skeleton (ask me not how, but they can).
When priests and necromancers deal with pulling back souls from the various planes, necromancers have a harder time pulling them from any plane other than the Astral Plane. Imagine the cosmos being like a building, and the Astral Plane like a hallway to the other planes, which are rooms in the building. It is much easier to grab someone from the hallway (like a necromancer is able to do) than it is to be able to open a door and grab someone from inside a room (the priests do with will godly help; the gods have the keys).
Forgive me, Professor Quill, my own teaching mannerisms are showing up again and I am beginning to lecture on this rather than answer directly. The truth of the matter is that the topic is extremely controversial; so much that, as long as there is conflict between necromancers and priests, wizards and ethicists, and arcane magic against divine powers, this topic will not be completely resolved. All of the statements I have made on necromancy are based on my findings in this realm of existence. There are many other realms, and their looks on the topic can be far different that what I have presented. Really, the truth of necromancy lies in the eye of the beholder. Pardon the pun.
Hope to hear from you again soon,
Yours Truly,
Artemis Alexander
Archmage, M.A.A., S.P., H.L., etc.
An article of yours entitled 'A Short Essay on Necromancy' was brought to my attention whilst visiting a Loremaster mentor of mine.
Whilst your theory carries a not insignificant degree of intuitive plausibility, I would respectfully contend the claim that the nature of things is as you describe with regards to these 'fields' and their relationship with magic.
I have two main concerns with your theory as presented, although I do believe I support your argument on other grounds not so metaphysically oriented.
My first difficulty regards your sources as relate to the claim that 'Studies have shown that living beings are surrounded by an invisible energy that can only be seen by the usage of the most powerful divinations.' I see no footnote reference, but apologise if such information was included in an appendix or bibliography.
My second difficultly is that, even if we accept the contested conjecture concerning ki (alas, alliteration allays argumentative arcanists' apathy - abject apologies), this presents something of a mystery regarding the use of magic on that which is nonsentient. You state that conjurers and transmuters work their magic by manipulating the life force of their target. How, then, are we to explain the summoning of that which possesses no such aura, in the case of conjuring Mage's Armour, or indeed the slick substance that is the result of the 'Grease' spell? If we are to conjecture that such substances are summoned by other means, we expose ourselves to a grave inconsistency - namely that these spells arbitrarily work in different ways depending on their targets. Hardly a satisfying conclusion.
Please accept my apologies in advance if my inferior training (I am little more than a beginner in the great scheme of arcane spellcasting) has left me ignorant of the obvious responses to my queries, or if such issues were addressed in previous papers of yours. Failing this, I await your reply.
Yours sincerely,
Ilyor Stardust
Conjurer in training under the great Acantha Carpe Verum
I will keep this letter brief, as my weak grasp of vocabulary forces me to share my thoughts via dictation and editing, creating far too many chances for error. However, I am a servant of Divine Ehlonna, and she has given me considerable power to battle the undead, a power that has given me considerable insight on the subject.
I'm sure you are aware of the ability to turn the undead, and, more importantly, that followers of the Sun God (Pelor) or Ehlonna can amplify the positive energies of turning to take out the animate force entirely. Now, if channel positive energy is in place of turning, and the powers of Sun turn it into a force DESTRUCTIVE to undead, are we then not forced to conclude that, as amplified positive energy is the killer, negative energy is the culprit powering undead?
Of course, sentient undead such as liches do posses souls. However, there is strong negative energy as "blood", and getting rid of it can kill even undead possessing souls. However, my main point is that, as skeletons, zombies, and the ilk are powered by negative energies, and as they are relatively easy to animate, the fact that they have souls is far from unquestionable and in fact highly doubtable.
Regards,
Claron Alador
Servant of Ehlonna.
I would like to include my humble thoughts on the exchange of opinions, you would have it, specifically on the area of reanimation and the alignments.
I've read your correspondences and would like to raise a question on to the non-tangible but yet ever real force which we come to call Good and Evil. It is by no mere mortal of rioting peasants with pitchforks, nor high ranking nobles, nor even the enlightened enforcers of some powers on behalf on Good. Perhaps not even the deities themselves have the ability to dictate Goodness or Evilness in anything. Such is this force which is the dictum of existence, or maybe just the multiverse. If one has a chance to create a verse of one’s own self, perhaps this can be experimented upon to some success? I wish luck to such an attempt.
As for the closer perspective of naming a necromancer evil (merely by word, without the actual effect of Evil), a corpse would have a psychologically and ethically (what is ethical right and wrong except in our heads really?) they have a higher sense of belonging to its owner than a broom or rope. Even if the soul has left it, it still belongs and as such many would see it as an abomination, being unable to accept the animation through necromancy. In similar perspective, does not the druids cry foul crime when a tree is felled to make said broom or rope? In this case, the name called matters little. Significant only to those that are concerned with worldly titles.
I would not proceed into vampires and liches as the process of their very transformation leaves much doubt and argument to possibility without some form of proof (read: standardized rule) of the multitude and myriad actual forces involved.
Sincerely,
Anonymous Observer
I read your essay with great interest. Though short, it purveys exactly the kind of thing that could dispel the various myths surrounding our most misunderstood art amongst other schools, and the public in general. It is my view that this essay would be put to good use in a governmental function, so that public servants might have a better idea of the capabilities of necromancers, so as to better protect their citizens, as well as not falsely accusing practitioners of the art. To that end, have you thought of publishing this essay more widely?
Despite this, I do have some contentions to raise on some of the technical aspects of your work. I understand that you are well traveled, and speak of strange places I have scarcely heard of, lands of warrior monks and places where people eat dog-meat, but one of my own interests is the transition of souls from mortal to petitioner status with regard to the planes. It is my understanding that the physical abilities of the souls 'shell' is completely distinct and separate from those of the soul. Except in the cases of bonded individuals, such as the eponymous angelic creatures, the health and abilities of the shell have no link to their spiritual 'aura' as you describe, only the mental characteristics do.
It is my belief that you have mistaken this energy as spiritual, when it is actually a physical movement of energy and completely unrelated. It is the outlook, mental attributes and importance to the cosmos that makes a soul distinct, and life-forces exemplify this. I believe this 'fiery, dense' aura you describe is a physical manifestation, not spiritual.
I also believe other scholars may refute you on your belief that mindless undead possess souls, but since you describe that no harm comes to these souls, I do not think your statement to be damaging to the necromancers credentials. I do believe you are technically incorrect. In fact, using the mind jar spell you mention, you are unable to control the creature, proving their soullessness, as well as the fact that their 'aura' cannot be seen, so it is a reasonable assertion that they don't have one.
Unfortunately, restoring the soul to the former body would simply not work, despite its vacancy, since the soul relies on a specific power source to function, often called 'positive' energy. An undead relies on a different source, and is unable to synthesize this energy (in fact it is quite harmful), so to use a blunt example, it would be like trying to light a fire with a water elemental- completely impossible due to their opposite natures.
I look forward to reading your counter-arguments in response to this and other responses you have undoubtedly received, as well as further work on this most worthy subject.
Dr. Jonathan Astern
Necrobiology, Ph.D.
As you may, or may not know, most of my work has been done in the field. As such, I feel unqualified to comment on the essential nature of Necromancy. Yet I do find it fit to share one of my experiences in some jungles far south of here.
An unnamed tribe of humans, separated from their brethren by a thousand years of solitude, had made a local Lich into a being of worship. They considered him a God. Upon my arrival to the tribe, I was introduced to this Lich, who immediately understood that I was far more educated that these imbeciles, and invited me to a conversation about the nature of things over some tea and smoked kobold flesh. I passed on the latter, but enjoyed his hospitality otherwise.
It appears that though the process that made him a Lich, he was essentially a good person. He explained to me that it was like a Saint who sinned occasionally during their life and then repenting of the sin. Even good people can do bad things, and though he regretted becoming a Lich - before the process the idea had consumed him. I admit some skepticism about his regret. After all, the populace worshiped him on hand and feet. But true to his word, he allowed me to leave the area peacefully, and even provided me with rations for the trip back.
Sincerely,
Sir. M. Shiningpantaloons
It has been long since we traveled to the Haunted Mansion together, during your studies of necromancy. As such you know that I am not much of a man of scholarship. Yet I feel that I should comment on your assay in the name of the Archpaladin.
Though logic supports your thoughts on this particular subject, in which Necromancy is merely considered an art of life force manipulation, just like all other schools of magic. This is true in the sense that magic itself is not moral, but all its applications are. And not only is the use of magic moral, there is a moral boundary between the realms of life and death.
Death in itself is of course not evil, but a part of life. However, the passing of the boundary between life and death does carry a moral aspect of evil. This aspect is the manner in which the boundary is crossed. I am not an expert in magic, but I will try to explain.
In normal death, as the Priests of the Sun God can likely attest to, it is not the presence of death, but the absence of life in the entity that makes it cross the line. As you might be aware, the presence of life is not a moral, nor a magical aspect. Upon the loss of life, the connection of the body and soul is separated and filled with death. Only powerful magic can re-attach this bond, though even trivial magics can preserve it when it is not yet gone.
This loss of life can be established by any form of magic, Arcane and Divine. Though the intention of this loss of life can be evil, the act is not evil in itself as it completely mimics the natural process. Necromancy does not confirm to these rules.
Unlike natural processes, Necromancy introduces, even forces, death onto the body. This means that the connection between soul and body is not severed by the absence of life, but the presence of death. Upon the complete separation of the soul and the body, the natural force of life cannot reclaim its connection and the entity remains dead.
It is this process that makes Necromancy in itself evil, as the introduction of death is both unnatural and evil by the very universal laws existing in this universe. Not all Necromancy results in death, that is true, but it is this concept of the introduction of death that makes Necromancy itself near unforgivable (though no-one will ever beyond redemption).
Similarly, the creation of the undeath is evil, as it is not a connection of life that exists between the captured soul and its host. Rather, the connection is one completely based on the temporary absence of death in the body and a forced connection with a soul. And as far as I have been able to establish, the soul captured does not require to be the original soul, but more often than not, this is the case. The resurrection spell works completely different, as it re-introduces the bond between the body and the soul that existed in life when the soul is willing to undergo this operation. And only the most powerful magics are able to restore this life force back to it's full potential; most beings subjected to this remain forever diminished.
Lastly, I must confess that I am disturbed by your article as to your personal spiritual health. Though I have great confidence in you, the inability to perceive the evil of Necromancy due to the power possessed by this method of magic is a sign of spiritual deception. Be aware of the forces of evil, my friend, for they are very powerful indeed. Understand that no amount of arcane might and satisfied curiosity can weigh against your soul's destiny after death. I agree that this subject is important enough to be investigated, but please ensure that your faith in the light remains unwavered.
Be well and may Heironeous' blessing be upon you!
Regards,
Lord-General Jaheem the Redeemed
Commander of the Shining Hand
Paladin of Heironeous
Your essay intrigues my philosophical side yet berates the part of me that practices the humble yet sophisticated art of necromancy. Divine powers that be grant the ability to control life and death through godly or un-godly wills and therefore the "soul" of every creature affected by their power must be taken into account. Yet where does the soul fit in an arcane or scientific account of necromancy? The simplest argument would be your own, however, the art of necromancy through arcane study is not interested and therefore does not take into account the soul. The soul is not part of the arcane or scientific equation.
I myself am not an evil man. I care for my people, donate my time and efforts to my community, and help shield the poor from the audacities of the wicked. I refuse to suffer the tyranny of evil men and use my necromantic wisdom to inflict justice (as can be defined whenever you have no jurisdiction) upon these evil men. I am a warrior of science and my sword is necromancy. I'm also a student of quantum physics and it's philosophies regarding time and space. I'm aware when the hourglass of a being is out of sand and usable for the art of necromancy.
When I raise a corpse for servitude, the corpse is merely a puppet and I am the puppeteer with my arcane necromantic power being the strings. After the soul has departed, the body is just a shell. Another material component to be used and when you're through, to be disposed of. If this seems an evil thing, though I assure you it isn't, then perhaps your next essay should address the art of conjuration as it is (as I've been made aware) a related cousin to necromancy.
I'm writing so that you're aware that there is most definitely a distinction between arcane necromancy and divine necromancy and I would like for you to either address it or make it clear in your essay if you do choose to publish it. I've been attacked and on several an occasion, forced to move from my home when the knowledge of my studies is made public. The misconception by the masses will always raise an alarm yet it is through the light of proper education that we will be able to pierce the darkness of ignorance.
I wish you well and hope that you will take this into consideration.
Yours truly,
Thrane Von Dragostein
Nechronomancer of the 12th Order
I must offer a different view upon this subject, one that is shared in much less august circles, but one which I believe to be true. In my research I have found that necromancy in and of itself is not a "evil" act. In fact much good can come of it. The problem arises in its abuse and misuse, and the temptation to do so is quite great. But something that most over look is the balance and needs of the so-called "spiritual energies".
The positive and negative energies that are so often referenced are opposite and opposing forces. Each wishes to cancel the other out, though not in a sentient kind of way. Rather, the two forces are naturally attracted to one another, similar to positive and negative charges of electricity. When they meet they cancel each other out and produce a void. This void is normally seen as 'death'.
The other aspect of this theory is the belief in the ki "nodes". As Archmage Artemis Alexander stated, there is a type of energy which can be manipulated and used that is often referred to as ki. But some believe that these areas in the body that naturally exude this energy are nodes of positive energy. When a person is harmed these nodes force positive energy into the harmed area and begin a process of healing.
These nodes gradually decay throughout life until they cannot support the creature any longer and that person dies as a result of no positive energy. When negative energy is forced into these nodes they cancel each other out and can bring about a premature death. Undead arise because of this negative energy. If negative energy is forced into these nodes after there is no positive energy present they fill the voids and act as an animating force.
Now, to keep this energy present an intervening force is generally required, often a soul of some form, but it does not have to be. Other types of mediums can be used to achieve the same end. Quite often a soul is used, simply because it is easier to find the soul originally possessed by the body, but other times it can be other souls, and most necromancers of higher moral standings will go to great lengths to avoid disturbing the souls of the dead.
Also, to the notion that a body may only hold one soul at a time, I do not have a definitive answer, but I do believe that there is a point that should be put out. When a fiend possesses an individual, or when a celestial shares a mortal’s body, that body has two souls within it. Now whether or not this can be potentially harmful to the body I cannot say, but the idea is a compelling one.
On that note I will end my input. While I do not even try to state that this is the absolute truth, it is what I personally believe to be true and a topic that I still pursue.
Sincerely yours,
Ichibald Trowl
Grandmaster of the Arcinist Order
I will not begin to pompously lift myself to a position of equality with such esteemed experts as the good Paladin with his weighty concerns for our respected Archmage's eternal well being, nor shall I lower myself to actually attempt to refute or question the validity of such valuable discussion. My only real point lies in focusing our attention on an essential detail and concern regarding the Art and its use.
Is it correct, or even possible, to place a moral standing upon the manipulation of magical energy? More specifically, does this so-called "positive" energy have a naturally "good" quality? Is it even necessarily opposed to so-called "negative" energy? Are either forms of energy moral in any way?
I would like to remind our illustrious colleagues that negative energy is not the only form of power used to animate the naturally dead. The confirmed existence of "deathless" beings is only one of many examples of bodies that no longer follow the natural course of physiological and biological functions, yet remain very clearly animated. Is such a being in any clear and definitive way more "good" than an animated creature whose source of energy is from negative energy?
The point is, that energy simply is. It is not good, evil, or anything in between. It is simply a naturally occurring force that can be harnessed to perform actions. If one is to try and argue that one form of energy is inherently good and another evil, that person is then placing a moral position on something that is incapable of morality. In fact, one could argue that the very position is an unfair point, due to the fact that such energy is incapable of arguing its own case (at least, according to my considerable knowledge at this date).
To then argue, that because one being has chosen the path of the lich the creature is inherently evil is miss the point of morality entirely. If the lich in question simply wishes to continue its studies indefinitely, without committing evil actions, there is nothing inherent about the process to suggest that this course is by its very nature evil unless one can clearly prove that negative energy is, by its very nature, evil. After all, if the deathless being and the lich perform the same actions after their respective transformations, how are they any different?
The discussion of souls, the nature of the animating soul of a mindless undead, the actually magical mechanics of the Resurrection spell, and the dual nature of energy (positive and negative) only serves to confuse the issue. Negative energy, the mindless undead, and the Necromancer that utilizes them both is no more evil than any other practitioner of the magical arts unless their actions (or the actions they are turned towards) are evil actions.
(The discussion of general tendencies and the frequency with which Necromancers are turned to evil acts is neither a matter of this discussion nor relevant. In fact, I would argue (elsewhere, in the appropriate forum) that one could find fault in the establishments that oppose the Art. Such events are very much a result of society, preconceived notions, and the practitioners of the Art falling into their assumed roles and fates, as dictated by their detractors.)
An unprotected traveler to the Negative Energy Plane is certainly doomed to death. However, this is no less true of the unprotected traveler to the Positive Energy Plane. This simple fact itself makes it quite clear to me that neither is inherently better than the other. After all, we are considering both at their sources, and in their least diluted forms.
I realize that my name, title, and the associations many will have with them both may cause some to argue against these points out of a misguided effort to attack the thinking of a "malcontent" or "vile, despicable abomination," but I would encourage anyone opposed to me personally to consider my argument on its own merits, without resorting to such a low blow. My own magical experience is not insignificant, and my experience regarding the Art is somewhat vast. One does not resist as many attacks by misguided "adventurers" as I have without some degree of expertise in such a field.
With sincere anticipation regarding further discussions in this field, and with nothing but the best wishes to all involved...
Geoff
Warlock Lich
Disciple of Vecna
Resident Sage of Inborn Magic, Planar Matters, and Religion
Pale Tower
University of the Arts
Aside from my oath to hunt down the undead, including Liches, I have always known that pragmatic solutions prevent unnecessary death. I have seen too many paladins rush headlong into their death at the hand of Vecna's unholy disciples. However, rest assured that with time comes, we will grand eternal rest to you and your soul once we get around to doing so.
I once again repeat that the denial of evil is to embrace it itself. As a Paladin, I have fought many struggles with my own devils and won over them. Yet forever I will need to stand vigilant against the evil both inside and outside me, for it can consume me. This manipulation I see also in your letter.
My studies (which I have picked up at a higher pace than ever before after reading Alexander's letter) were already partially laid out to you all before the last letter on this subject was sent. I will therefore focus on your point made on positive and negative energy and the occurrence of the Deathless.
You argue that positive and negative energies are merely 2 variants of a kind of magic without any moral aspect to its existence. Though I cannot contest that both are a form of energy, the infusion both have with life and death and therefore good and evil are as basic as the primordial energies the Gods of this world are made of.
I have tried to understand this myself, but the only way that I have been able to explain this is that the Creator of this world has made life sacred. This is as factual as the greenness of grass and cannot be explained in any different manner as it is by godly will that this is so. Your argument is based on the idea that we are all color blind.
This simple assumption places the moral value of good and evil on forces of life and death and therefore positive and negative energy. You indicate that Positive Energy is no better than Negative Energy for its ability to kill a living being. However, the way of death by Negative Energy is inherently different from death by Positive Energy, rather than simply a variant of one-another.
As I explained before, Negative Energy inherently kills by the inclusion of death in a living being and because of this it is evil. Positive Energy, at the other hand, does not inherently kill. Even more importantly, it infuses a being with more life and it therefore inherently good. It is another essence of living beings that makes that the inclusion of Positive Energy results in death: boundaries.
Unlike the gods, living beings as limited and have boundaries to what their body can take. A normal person will have a certain presence of life. This presence of life can differ slightly with time. Things that are good can lift its spirit, infusing it with life and happiness. One should think about basic things such as beauty, love, compassion or light. An increase of Positive Energy therefore makes someone feel better than before, makes him/her more resilient against attacks on his/her body, etc. This is the very essence of healing magic.
The life in a person can also greatly diminish by illness, loss, deceit and evil acts. This can be due to the forces of life and death, represented by Positive and Negative Energy cancel each other out. Similar to healing someone being struck by an Inflict Wounds spell, but also be 'voluntary release' of life by that person. In the end, though, natural death and illness occurs purely through the loss of life, not the inclusion of death.
As I mentioned, living beings are not infinite and can therefore only have life according to the boundaries of their being. It has been known for experienced adventurers to have much broader limits to the amount of life than the average farm boy. These boundaries, however, indicates the limits of existence of the being. Cross these boundaries and the subject will die. This is why we are not meant to live on the Positive Energy Plane as you described. Though this is abstract, this fundamental difference makes Positive Energy good as opposed by the evil of Negative Energy.
On the subject of the deathless, unlike popular belief under many adventurers, the deathless are not undead. They are not even animated. If you refer back to my previous letter, you can see that I speak of the separation of the bond between the body and the soul. There is no being that can prevent this separation; any soul crossing that border will die. This is no less true for those who were once the living being associated with the deathless you encounter.
Despite this, there are those who are honorable and servants of the light beyond any question, who have dedicated their life to a cause which was more important than their lives and death. These people would wish the greatest of good to all us in this world, even if it would come at the greatest of pain to themselves. These eternal guardians gained, upon their death, a special magic bond with their bodies, in a way stronger than life and death and, many believe, deific in nature. This deific bond does not grand life, but it allows for the souls of the other world to engage in the duties that it was determined to do in this world if the calling comes. This can be anything from protecting a burial chamber from adventurers to forming armies of light against the forces of evil.
This constitutes the main difference between the undead and the deathless. Whereas the undead are animated by the unwillful binding of a soul to a body by the use of negative energy, the deathless are willful guardians that return to their bodies to do their duty because they would not have eternal rest if they could not do so. This loyal bond to all that is good, this unwavering sense of duty is so holy a number of people refers to them as 'exalted beings'.
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, Mr. Geoff, why are Liches evil? As I mentioned before, this is because of the inherit evil of Negative Energy that sustains his unlife and the boundaries of living beings. At a point in time, everyone will cross the line between life and death. Mr. Geoff, you also have done so, but have attempted to cheat death by aligning yourself with the egoistic power of evil. You have bound your soul unwillingly to your body beyond its death and therefore are no different from other undead. You could argue that this has been your own choice, but I know from my former mentor that you feel every day like destroying your phylactery, long for rest, are always restless, wander aimlessly muttering to yourself, studying not your original studies, but those of death and those that would ease your pains. This is because your soul wants to depart, even though your consciousness does not say this to you. This evil you have done upon yourself is the reason why we hunt down Liches and destroy what they themselves cannot destroy.
Lastly, let me again emphasise that you should all consider the evil that you try to deny. Facing evil will destroy it even if you do not defeat it, denying evil is opening yourself to it and allowing it to take control of you. I can claim to know, I've been there.
Regards,
Lord-General Jaheem the Redeemed
Commander of the Shining Hand
Paladin of Heironeous
It is a pleasure to see that even misunderstood and reviled arts such as this one can evoke such a positive interest in a wide range of scholars. I envy some of the less anonymous among you, who claim lichdom as part of your written title to strangers. You clearly live in a better world than many do.
In particular, I read one lich's article, the sage Geoffs, on the nature of concentrated 'nodes' with great enthusiasm. My own studies on necrobiolic tissue has yielded similar results, and when enlarged and stimulated, allowed tremendous improvements in their physical strength and durability. A similar effect can be seen in undead who have existed for considerable lengths of time, where the nodes see considerable influxes of energy, they can, increase in size and allow for greater flow in the future, much as living tissue adapts to resistance exercise.
Unfortunately, this is the only area yet found in necrobiology where the dead tissue acts identically to living, and only when animated, and these improvements are inferior when compared to those that naturally occur in persistent undead, where the growth comes from a permanent increase in this energy, rather than just its capacity or efficiency. The increased flow has benefits other than just increased power and durability, such as regrowth of tissue, as well as more exotic uses.
Prospective necromancers will discover that understanding of these nodes are necessary for making any significant improvements in their minions (bar actually adding or removing limbs and organs, which is the favoured practise of an associate of mine, but not one that I use). Just like the living, the dead can improve with training and calculated effort.
I wouldn't justify creating or maintaining undead (perish the thought!) of course, but necromancers interested in the long term survival of their creatures ought to treat them less as walking bodies, and more like raw recruits in an army, pushing them to achieve their potential. Of course, if more did, it would probably make people like Jaheem's work that little bit harder.
Regards,
Dr. Jonathan Astern
PhD, Necrobiology
I will admit that I am not the most qualified to speak on the subject of Necromancy, and the various arts found within the discipline (animation, possession, curses, and the like), but if I may have a moment of your time, I should like to offer some thoughts.
It seems there is one thought that is common to our community which I can not bring myself to agree with, despite your strong arguments. It seems foolish to me to say that energy is completely amoral. Now, please don't get me wrong. I do not necessarily think that energy (of the Positive, Negative, or Elemental sort) is directly moral. Rather, I think there may be a sort of middle ground, where one must consider the tools they are using, lest the tools begin to use you.
Is a river merely water? No, it is a combination of things. Gravity. Terrain. Movement. A man may, through careful study, build structures that allow him to contain, guide, and even harness the power of a river. However, he must be careful. Should he miscalculate, he will find the same river he once controlled sweeping his home out to the sea. The river is not evil, nor malignant, but it follows it's own laws, which can be quite harmful to the human who underestimates them.
Those familiar with my other works know me to have little direct experience with the finer points of the Necromatic Arts. I am, myself, a scholar of Divination and Evocation by both curiosity and necessity. While neither of these is innately good nor evil, I have come to understand the implications of both Pattern and Intent.
Mr. Geoff, earlier you claimed that a man might pursue lichdom, not out of "evil desires," but rather out of a pursuit of knowledge. As implacably curious as I, myself, happen to be, one quick point must be made: Knowledge is not, nor has it ever been, a virtue. The pursuit of knowledge can be as evil as it is good. (I am reminded of the research of one Inspector Legrasse. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! An important precautionary tale for us all!)
Your argument, Mr. Geoff, I believe centers around the Intent of the caster. A valid, if somewhat flawed, principle is used by many (ironically enough) Druids in my home world. "If it harm none, do what thou whilst." I once had the distinct pleasure of dealing with a powerful, and very holy, necromancer, Lady Persephone Mordeweiss, Professor Emeritus of Necromancy at the prestigious Tower of High Arcana in Bastion. In proper doses, the Necromantic arts can be used in a very righteous manner. Any art, from the strongest Abjuration to the wildest Evocation to the most maddening Transmutation is judged, in part by the intent of the caster.
However, if I may so suggest, only a fool believes that Intent is sufficient to alter the course of a river. My Intent may be powerful enough to conjure a sphere of bright flame and direct it towards my enemy, but I am not foolish enough to believe that (at least without other preparations) that if I am too close to that same flame, I will not myself be burned. If one dives into a raging river, you may swim to either shore, but you will wind up down stream.
This is why we consider Pattern. I do not know where Good and Evil come from, where they are going, or why they are here. Suffice to say, for this argument, they are here. (If we desire more on the subject, let us invite theologians, not arcanists.) Study indicates that certain things (by blessing, nature, or blind chance, I don't know) lend themselves to Good or Evil more than others.
In this study, one Pattern may be seen over and over again. "Positive" Energy, while as dangerous as the other, lends itself to this concept of Good. "Negative" Energy lends itself towards Evil. These patterns are established. While not all Positive Energy (or examples of its' use) is innately good, nor is Negative Energy (in all cases) innately evil, any student of arcane theory will state that the overall tendency is quite clear. In short, that's the way the river flows.
It must therefore be stated that, we as Arcanists, should be much more careful with the tools we use. Magic (to use so broad a term) is not the same sort of tool as a sword. When I call upon the powers of foresight, I am not wielding the same tool as a Blacksmith does in his hammer. Necromancy is not a shepherd’s crook. If we are completely honest with ourselves, Positive and Negative energy aren't even the same sort of tool as Elemental Energy, at least when it comes to the Patterns that can be observed.
In limited doses, an evil man may use positive energy (as even Dark Priests may heal the wounds of their followers), and a good man may use negative energy (as I use Waves of Exhaustion to easily capture, without injuring, my foes). However, in each case, care must be taken. A Dark Priest who spent too much time healing the sick would likely lose standing with his Evil Benefactor. As I might, if I spent too much time dwelling on things Dark could risk my own soul (as if I haven't gone dangerously close to that once before). Fall into the river, and you may find yourself where you did not intend when you reach the shore.
Yes, we shall be judged on Intent when we seek our final rest. The Ruby Sorceress decrees that Death must come. The gods will judge us when that day arrives. However, I imagine we will be judged poorly who wield the tools of the gods, but treat them as if they were the toys of a child.
Archmage Olus Snikda
Fatespinner & Geometer
Lord Master of The Observatorium
I must admit, that I am intrigued (something I can readily state does not happen often, given my extensive experience and long life and longer undeath). Though I will again reiterate that I do not need the so-called “rest” of which you speak, I appreciate the offer. Should this existence ever bore me I will readily come to you…
I hesitate to bring up my polite rebuttal to your moral suggestions, but I am forced. Please do not misconstrue this point as an effort to lead our discussion into a tangent; it is not. It is merely and effort to continue this fascinating exploration of my favorite subject.
Our good Lord-General repeatedly brings up the concepts of “good” and “evil,” of which I am quite sure we are all familiar. Now, at the risk of sounding like I am attempting to use circular logic, I must present a problem:
Is “good” necessarily better than “evil”?
I know this may come as a surprise to many, but it is extremely important that we each choose our own moral compass during this discussion, and that this compass be supported by some significantly weighty material. If we fail to have good references while discussing such important matters, we run the risk of falling into a horribly muddy and confusing moral area. This moral area is one of relativism, or the idea that everyone is allowed, or even encouraged, to choose what is right for them.
I do not follow such a principle. I know this may come as a great surprise to many, given my nature and the assumed extensions one often makes of the free-willed undead, but let me assure you that my morals are based on very solid and well established principles. These principles come from my faith as a follower of the Maimed Lord, my master, Vecna. Likewise, I respect our philosophical opponents, particularly those as well versed as our good Paladin Jaheem, because they too follow a strict and exacting moral guide. The fact that Jaheem’s faith and mine are at odds does not diminish the fact that in both our minds we are doing “good”.
To further this discussion, one should look at several families of common spells. The various Detect [Alignment] spells, Protection from [Alignment] spells, and Magic Circles Against [Alignment] spells all follow very similar formulae, and likewise suggest that there is a universal compass that determines the greater multiverse’s “viewpoint” on our moral beliefs. However, it is important to note that simply because in our common tongue we describe one moral view as “evil” and another “good” does not mean that magic as a whole does. It simply recognizes a clear difference and opposition that is intrinsic to the moralities in question. This can also be demonstrated by the clear relation that certain other spells have to alignment, as best demonstrated (and discussed) by practitioners of divine magic who are experts in the given domains of their deities.
Now, to attempt to return to the subject at hand (that being the morality of Necromancy), I would like to ask our illustrious experts to focus their attention closely on two important aspects of the Art:
1. Is the spell or magical effect in question evil (either in our common terminology or in the beliefs of your faith)?
2. Is the necromantic effect being used in a manner that is evil (again, either in our common terminology or in the beliefs of your faith)?
For the following points I very heavily rely on a particularly excellent source of Necromantic lore. This ancient tome is not considered “updated” in any way that I am aware, and while many of the techniques and methods are clearly outdated, I believe that the moral discussions presented in this fine work are valuable to anyone considering this fine subject. I am referring to the Complete Book of Necromancers (AD&D).
Within this ancient text is a discussion of several interesting points worth mentioning to our esteemed colleagues. First, let me direct you to the discussion of Black Necromancy (which I am sure many would describe as evil), Gray Necromancy (neutral perhaps…?) and White Necromancy (arguably good).
Spells categorized as “black” would likely possess an “evil” morality, such that it could be augmented by the heightened knowledge possessed by many clerics of “evil” gods through their knowledge of their deity’s domain. The tome describes many such spells as causing immediate and sometimes irrevocable death. Such spells likely fit in with Jaheem’s opinion of Necromancy in general.
On the other hand, a spell that our Paladin friend (may I call you a friend, Lord-General Jaheem? I do so enjoy these discussions…) would surely oppose, Animate Dead, is clearly described as only a “gray” spell in this tome. The reason the tome makes this distinction is not immediately clear, but one can surmise it is based upon the intent of the spell caster. In the case of the Animate Dead spell, it presents the idea that to raise a Zombie to “carry one’s luggage” is not inherently evil, but that using it to raise Undead minions “for the purpose of attacking a merchant caravan” probably is. Because the spell can be used in a manner that is not harmful to anyone else (a point which is clearly under debate in this prestigious circle, due to the perplexing discussion on souls and their supposed connections with their original, host bodies) it is suggested that this spell is a “gray” spell. (I do realize that Animate Dead can be augmented by Clerics of “evil” deities, suggesting that it is instead a “black” spell, but I simply present this ancient argument as an indication that matters are not necessarily as simple as they might seem.)
Of the “white” necromancy spells, the distinction is that these spells are clearly benign or beneficial in nature. It discusses many spells tragically lost to the sands of time since the tome’s creation, but suggests that spells such as False Life or Halt Undead may in fact be completely morally safe for use by “good” spellcasters. While I may find this distinction laughable, it is certainly important to many such as Jaheem, as it suggests that some Necromancy spells are perhaps not only neutral and safe, but may in fact be genuinely “good.”
On a side note, I highly encourage Sir Jaheem to consider the plight of a Necromancer described in this text both as a Deathslayer and a King among Necromancers, one Talib al-Ysawis the Magnificent (and the Accursed). This man was at one time married to a known Dread Necromancer, one Kazerabet, Angel of the Dark, and yet was “redeemed” and went on in the rest of his life to fight the undead (particularly liches such as myself) with all the vigor and energy of a Paladin. One could describe him as a “white” necromancer. His story and the stories of many others presented in this tome are worthy of notice. (There are several “black” necromancers such as Kazerabet and at least one “gray” Anatomist discussed in the Complete Book of Necromancers.)
Now, to specific questions and concerns:
I cannot bring myself to see your point of life being sacred. You describe it in a manner similar to it being self-evident. While this works for some, for those of us that have shuffled off the mortal coil, we would certainly not find it as clear as you profess. For our sake, can you find a way to clarify this?
You are quite correct in your analogy to color-blindness; unfortunately I must profess to such blindness personally. Because of this, I cannot agree with your assumption that good and evil are basically related to life and by extension positive and negative energy. Likewise, an Undead being in the Negative Energy Plane experiences effectively the same benefits as a living creature does on the Positive Energy Plane. Because of this I would argue that while the energies causing these effects are opposites, the effects are simply mirror images of each other.
Death is death, no matter how the source. If positive energy can kill, it is no better than negative energy. One would not argue an unintelligent creature was evil because it followed its nature and killed its prey for food. Likewise, I think it is placing moral thinking upon unthinking energy to describe any form of energy as inherently good or evil.
You suggest that the problem with the Positive Energy Plane is one of boundaries. Let me respond to that in several ways. First, undeath removes many of the unnecessary boundaries we experience in our existence. This is apparent in the lengthened existence of undead creatures and what is often a generally more sturdy and resilient being physically (I have suffered no illness, fatigue, nausea, or debilitating magical effects of which living creatures suffer in well over 300 years…). Second, many of the deities worshipped by mortals were once mortal themselves. This includes both those who chose to raise themselves up to the level of a power (such as my lord Vecna) and others who were raised through divine intercession (such as St. Cuthbert, a frequent patron of Paladins). Finally, crossing limits often results in death, as you mentioned. Is it any better to die from excess positive energy than negative? One is still dead in either case.
On the subject of the Deathless, you are indeed better versed than many an adventurer. I am afraid, however, that your faith is blinding you to reason here. How exactly is a Deathless not animated? They are unliving bodies acting out of internal connections to an energy source. The source is certainly different than an undead’s, but that was never under debate.
You describe the Deathless as beings “who have dedicated their life to a cause which was more important than their lives and death.” I too have dedicated my life (and subsequent undeath) to a cause too important to let go. In my case it is my Necromantic Art. How is such dedication different? These Deathless have “a special magic bond with their bodies,” which I also share with mine. The animating energy is different, but the effect is the same, sir.
You also ascribe the primary difference between Deathless and undead as one of “unwillful binding” between the body in question and a soul. Sir Jaheem, this is simply not true for all undead. I know I am perfectly willing to be bound to my body in the manner I am. True, mindless undead have no real will to speak of and therefore no choice in the matter, but vampires, liches, and many other forms of undeath involve a conscious choice, which many embrace wholeheartedly.
You ask, “Why are liches evil?” I would say that I am not. I know there are many who would say I am, but one must look at the source and the moral compass of the parties in question. I am not evil. I follow the dictates of Vecna and do what is right in the Maimed Lord’s eyes. In the eyes of a priest of Pelor I am certainly an abomination. Who is correct? I would say that only time will answer that question satisfactorily.
Finally, before I end this missive I must ask, who is this former mentor of whom you speak, Sir Jaheem? I am intrigued by the hint you leave us that your own past may be significantly more interesting than the average Paladin of Heironeous, and I wonder if perhaps I knew this individual at one point…? While I am sure I cannot agree with this sage’s suggestion that intelligent, free-willed undead such as myself are “suicidal” in regards to this existence, the point is not entirely without foundation. It is a well-known fact that any being that is born (or hatched, as the case may be) a mortal, attains immortality (or undeath, which I consider to be synonymous), and survives their first hundred years or so tend to go “underground” for a period of time. During this qausi-madness, their psyche adjusts to the demands and changed perspective needed to survive more indefinitely. My underground period ended some 237 years ago. I still celebrate the anniversary of this date as a second “birthday” if you will. Prior to this point I do seem to recall the restlessness you described, but it has been more than two centuries since any similar urges filled my worm-eaten head.
Oh, and should you ever find yourself interested in safe passage into the Pale Tower, or an interest in discussing this or any other subject with me in person, please do not hesitate to ask. I might even be able to find a helpful fiend or two to join us in the conversation. I understand that friendly contact with a denizen of the underworld is sometimes found to be useful by Paladins of your high standing…
Your friend,
Geoff
Warlock Lich
Disciple of Vecna
Resident Sage of Inborn Magic, Planar Matters, and Religion
Pale Tower
University of the Arts
I continue to appreciate the blunt honesty and enlightened thinking shown by this particular collection of philosophers, it is not in many places that paladins and Vecna-ites converse in intellectual discussion openly, and without disguise or subterfuge.
I'm not sure I am familiar with this 'complete' book of necromancy, i am astounded that a secret-worshipping undead would share such information, as much as I am amazed that any work might be considered 'complete' on such a fragmented field. I must admit that I am skeptical, not only of its existence, but of its reliability as an end-all (pun not intended) source of necromancy (what fun is that?). And yet you mention so off-handedly that it is a second edition- why was the necromantic community not informed of the existence of the first!? Puzzling.
Still, that’s not the questions you seem more interested in, what are, seem to be the moral implications of a negative energy plane and of necromancy in general. I don't know why you continue to cling to defining things as 'right' and 'wrong' when they have little relationship to 'good' and 'evil' !
An action that is right is right because it had the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people, which can only be seen afterwards, and then only partially. Good, by comparison, is an action that contains the 'essence' of goodness, which stems from the higher planes (which are, yes, somewhat linked to the positive energy planes). You see, goodness and evil are not actions, they are states, completely unrelated with right and wrong.
Thus, i am of the opinion that particular acts of necromancy, such as the ubiquitous animate dead spell is an 'evil' spell, because it contains essence of the lower planes, but this does not affect the morality of its use, since it still can used for 'right' purposes. Similarly, Paladins are bastions of 'goodness', not 'rightness', since rightness is too complicated for any paladin to completely encompass. Their actions, while virtuous, do not create a more 'right' society, only a 'good' one. Pragmaticism is the best 'alignment' in my view, to do right rather than good or evil.
Still, I’m not usually given to these philosophical ramblings, but I do digress.
I am interested in your thoughts, Jaheem, on this 'exile' period you mention, as well as any other mental cycles or obstacles that sentient undead encounter, since I am beginning a new doctorate on necropsychology, and feel your particular insight would prove most beneficial, and, in your case, most worthwhile.
Yours,
Jonathan Astern, Ph.D.
Necrobiology
While I am most pleased that a paladin can openly converse with others of my kind I must admit I am somewhat envious since in my first life I was thrown out of my order for a joining forces with a necromancer to repel a demonic taskforce, should you be interested in abandoning your order's somewhat restricted views on undeath, and embracing the powers of necromancy I would be more then willing to pass your name on to a few of the devils I have influence over. I am more then confident that they would be willing to teach you much in exchange for your servitude.
It pains me to see that you have failed to examine the truth behind the animation of a dead being into its second life, though I can not blame you if your respective libraries fail to include copies of the Drow text Tsabal Gulstrae or the elven tome Maie Firvain since they are rather difficult to come across. Still if common is your preferred tongue you should at least familiarize yourselves with the Necronomicon, also known as the book of the dead.
While some of you have mentioned that it is indeed negative energy that reanimates a corpse into its second life as an undead being you are wrong that it is soulless, indeed if this were true then a simple inflict spell would be able to produce some sort of animation. And may I also add that the rule of one body one soul is clearly untrue, for those of us that have set up cloning labs and successfully created clones of individuals using a cubic inch of their flesh will find that you can have many cloned bodies stored away whilst the original continues to live. And should they die then their soul can simply switch into the body of one of the clones with the only side effect being the usual shock that one gets from having returned from the dead. Oddly, the spell True resurrection does not cause this side effect and I would be most grateful if one of you honorable sages could explain this to me.
Forgive me for it appears I have been rambling, it was the nature of undeath that was supposed to be discussed, first the separation of the soul from the mind and body must be accepted after all the speak with dead spell allows the caster to gain information from a corpse about what it knew in its life, upon death the soul leaves the body taking with it the sum total of experience that it acquired from its life yet the body retains the memories of this life. When animating a body as an undead being a spirit is dragged from the negative energy plain and forced into the host body, a portal connects this spirit to the negative energy plain in the same way that a firstborn soul is connected to the positive energy plane, this is why the temperature around an undead being is colder then the surrounding area since the heat that comes into contact with the being is dragged to the endless void that is the negative energy plane.
Some undead need to feed to maintain this link to the negative energy plane whilst others such as myself can endure the long centuries untroubled by such cravings. Why this is so is something that I myself have yet to find an answer to but I suspect that it relates to the strength of the current flowing from the negative energy soul to the negative energy plane. This covers animated undead such as skeletons and zombies but as we know a far wider range of undead beings exists and it is the explanation of some of them that i will now devote words to.
A creature such as a vampire can procreate without the need of using magic to open a portal to the negative energy plane and drag out a new soul, instead the infect the current soul inhabiting a firstborn creature and contaminate its soul through the negative conduit that supports it, in time this infected soul will be warped almost beyond recognition yet it will still display some of the characteristics and all of the experience that it had prior to contamination.
Take care my mortal peers for another way of fusing a negative energy spirit with your own soul is to commit an act so malicious that it attracts the attention of a negative spirit, shortly after your death it will hunt you down and reanimate your body, in this way the skillful hunters known as mourgs are born.
On a side note I apologize for any grammatical errors made in this letter since it has been sometime since I last tried to write in common, with a spell a corpse can perfectly recall all that it ever knew but alas it appears that I can not.
Your unliving friend,
Azzor Corpsekin
It is most amusing to see so many different experts communicate in such a way. Why, just this morning I was thinking the very same thing. What are the exact nuances of necromancy? It seems even the worshippers of undead-hating gods are joining in. I apologise if I might sound patronising or antagonistic, it is a rare occasion I get to converse with intelligent beings - my most loyal and intelligent minion is unfortunately rather lacking in the eloquence to discuss such matters as these.
It appears to me that simply by manipulating the energies from the positive and negative energy planes, you can perform a wide variety of effects, even to the point of Necromancy being an entire school unto itself. I specialise in Animation, and so I will speak on that.
On the Subject of the Animation of Dead Tissue
Let me tell you first, that in no way is the original soul contained in the body ever harmed in the creation of a lower undead creature such as a zombie or skeleton. It is nonsense to think that the soul would be bound in any way, when the resulting creature is mindless. The closest analogy I can think of are golems, who are animated by the binding of elemental spirits. There have been several cases where golems have broken into a blind berserker rage due to the bindings on the spirit being lax, but when have you ever seen a skeleton lash out like that? My findings indicate that while both golems and the lesser undead share a common trait (that is, they are not truly alive, and they are, for the most part, mindless), undead have no spirit bound within them. Further proof of this comes with the common spell speak with dead, which partially animates the body in order to commune with it's memories. Could it be, then, that a zombie or skeleton is animated and controlled by the knowledge of the person whom inhabited the body before? It makes sense, as the undead appear to retain whatever motor skills it had in life. It is of my belief that even potent spells like awaken undead do not bind the soul, or any soul, in fact. They create an imitation of the soul, and use the memories and knowledge stored as an imprint on the body. This faux-soul is still not the original, which has long since departed, even if the new soul remembers it's previous 'life'.
The Effect of Animation of the Undead, and Resurrection spells.
Then why do the lesser resurrection spells fail when they try to resurrect the undead? It's simple. With simple magic like raise dead, the magic isn't strong enough to locate the soul and bind it back to the body, as the imprint of the soul is damaged by the animation process. The spell cannot locate the soul, so it cannot be bound back into the body. Even when high level spells fail - it is because there are two 'souls', and since one of them is in what appears to be a living body, so the spell assumes the target has already been affected. This, I would consider a failsafe so people do not have souls bound to them while they are still alive.
In the case of 'intelligent' undead, like Shadows, Vampires, etc., they do not affect the soul in any way. Think of the soul being in three parts: The mind, the soul, and the 'battery'. The battery is what powers people, and it can be either positive or negative. What vampires and shadows do is drain that battery and convert it into negative energy. Yes, the afflicted appears to die, but the inrush of negative energy happens before it's soul leaves the body (or at least, spirit, as Shadows are incorporeal). The thralldom thereafter appears to be a self-defense mechanism. Resurrection spells cannot work as the individual so afflicted hasn't technically 'died', they have been transformed. Other undead, such as those created through a powerful emotion (I have often seen Dry Husks around my abode, for instance), are souls that have been affected badly enough to have been split. While part of the soul departs, the most strongly affected part, usually that of the emotional part of the soul, stays behind. Since these naturally occurring undead usually leave behind the rational part of their being, they are fuelled totally by the strength of their emotion (hence why most undead are a sight to behold). Resurrection spells cannot work on them as their soul is split, and only destroying the vessel in which the remaining vestigial part of the soul can totally reunite the two.
Why Lichdom?
Ah, Lichdom. I myself have only completed my transcendence to lichdom, so I am not the one to ask in all authority. But it does have it's upsides, and most of them are conveniences I would not want to go without. For all intents and purposes, I would be what the Necronomicon would describe as a Dry Lich, which in my opinion is far superior to a normal Lich, but the reforming is an annoyance, to say the least. What would you say to having complete insurance against any accident that might befall you? Not to mention it really saves on resurrection costs if some paladin tries smiting you to death. That's most inconvenient. Also, you're free to experiment on new kinds of undead without fear of being killed by your new creation. Knowledge and curiosity are fine reasons to pursue lichdom, but I am in it for the immortality. I would so love to see how the world unfurls, and once you're practically unkillable, what's the rush? I can attain knowledge later.
Deathless
Deathless have baffled me for years. They are practically undead, apart from their connection to the positive energy plane. Many a night I have spent looking up dusty tomes on the deathless, only to draw a blank. I am most interested in their creation, as unlike regular undead, they take on a most pleasant appearance, instead of the corrupted forms most negative energy beings take. I would be most interested in any material or knowledge relating to the Deathless. Is it that the soul remains and is actively fueled by the positive energy plane? Or something more? Why are all deathless intelligent, rather than mindless, like the undead?
Your humble servant,
Artif Nessuan
Bachelor of Ritualistic Necromancy
many would argue that this process in itself is an evil act. however, what if one animated the body of a mass murderer, condeming his soul to eternal punishment in servitude to those who strive for good. it is my proposal that the country should actively employ those like me and introduce a punishment after that of capital punishment of being animated to serve the state.
thank you.
Lord Wilith Jaerg. Master ArchNecromancer of the Lysan Rangers
O.L.E M.N.A PhD
Please brothers, you tell the world way too much about our art. Let them run from us. Let them fear the unknown. After being around a few hundred years I have learned that the less a hunter knows about my voluntary condition, the better. To our paladin reader, please come pay me a visit. I'd like to add your skin to my collection
I have met a great many of your kind. Sadly your narrow point of view bores me and usually your kind doesn't last long. To my fellow 'liches' - I implore you to keep silent. How long was each of your journeys? How hard was it to unlock the secret of immortality? Don't give these things away. For twenty turns of the circle I was a wizard who specialized in Necromancy. For five turns an Arch-Mage with an affinity for the negative elemental plane. My last five turns in life I reverted back to my original wizard studies but in an epic fashion. I have taken to studying the far realms and other planes as of late. Do you know that the secrets of the demi-lich are within reach if you study hard and long enough? I wish you all the best, well most of you that don't wear armor at least
Kihon Necro
Regarding the matters of necromancy, the nature of good and evil, the disposition of the soul and so on, I must admit that I've thought a good deal upon this subject. When I was younger, I was a starveling thief, but my life was saved by a kindly old man who found me on his doorstep and invited me in so I wouldn't die of the winter cold. I lived in his house for a number of years, learning the arts of wizardry, including but neither limited to nor focusing on, the art of necromancy. What I usually leave out of this tale is the fact that the kindly old man was no longer alive and I was in fact living in the barrow mound of a lich.
The moral and theological question relating to this is, can an evil person, even a lich, do good? By saving the freezing child on his doorstep that night--me--Master Boen certainly did, at least as I judge it. Of course he did not define it as that, simply as "enlightened self interest" as he called it, noting that while he could have animated my corpse after I froze to death, zombies were not well suited for organizing scroll racks or any of the hundreds of mundane tasks a wizards apprentice might do. And, as he pointed out, he was not alone in his "enlightened self interest," since while I was rightly terrified of walking willingly into the tomb of a lich with the lich right there, I would rather do that than freeze to death alone in the middle of winter.
Of course, some would argue that this was not true kindness but false kindness, but if you're freezing to death, any kindness is welcome. And after a while, a lonely crabby old man seems to just be a lonely crabby old man, even if he's dead.
As Master Boen taught me--and I haven't seen any other arcane studies to show him in error--the various divinations to detect evil detect overall karmic balance, not minor fluctuations, and, to give an example, a middling cleric of an evil deity would detect as far more evil than Master Boen himself because, as Master Boen put it, "Sucking up to an evil god is considered more wicked than just telling Death to go bugger off."
Master Boen had a number of such observations. When he discovered me reading the Libram of the Pale Masters, he dismissed them as "Ninnies who do things by halves. If you want to be a lich, become a powerful wizard and work the formulae. If you want to experiment, try something less permanent and more useful." Then he boxed my ear and froze it, telling me that if I wanted to heal myself, there were means in the collection of necromantic curios if I was clever enough to find them. Which was entirely true--an eternal wand of Inflict Light Wounds paired with a talisman enchanted with Kiss of the Vampire allowed me to heal myself. Of course, it meant that I was in the form of a vampire as I was healed by dark radiance from the negative planes, but when the talisman was removed, I returned to life and the healing remained, negative transmuted to positive. More than that, two negative energy necromancy spells paired together had the net result of a healing conjuration.
Which of course comes again to the moral question: Is the evil that saves your life evil?
At worst, I'd have to say it's the lesser of two evils, but it's still preferable to death. Of course, that's also what Master Boen told me when I asked him why he'd become a lich.
Which is I suppose what the living have in common with the undead: neither of us look forward to death.
Deepest regards,
Ivar the White
Mage of the Arcane Order
When I raise a corpse for servitude, the corpse is merely a puppet and I am the puppeteer with my arcane necromantic power being the strings. After the soul has departed, the body is just a shell. Another material component to be used and when you're through, to be disposed of. If this seems an evil thing, though I assure you it isn't, then perhaps your next essay should address the art of conjuration as it is (as I've been made aware) a related cousin to necromancy.
I had to comment upon this notion.
When it comes down to it, the only thing that a person truly owns is their body. If my body were animated as your undead slave, I would be enraged.
I know that the next argument is that *I* would never know that the shell of my body is being used for your purposes. That is irrelevant. My body, dead or alive is not yours to make your slave.
I would say that this very issue is addressed by a planar cabal known as "The Dustmen." They use mindless undead to do the mundane tasks of their faction. But it is also only by making a contract and monetary payment to the person before they are deceased. I ask, do you make such arrangements?
I do, however, appreciate your comparing it to the art of conjuration, which I have not considered before. I must think on that some more.
Sincerely,
Jamila N'Sanna
Professor of Chaotic Good Studies
Sigil Prep
When it comes down to it, the only thing that a person truly owns is their body. If my body were animated as your undead slave, I would be enraged.
I know that the next argument is that *I* would never know that the shell of my body is being used for your purposes. That is irrelevant. My body, dead or alive is not yours to make your slave.
I would say that this very issue is addressed by a planar cabal known as "The Dustmen." They use mindless undead to do the mundane tasks of their faction. But it is also only by making a contract and monetary payment to the person before they are deceased. I ask, do you make such arrangements?
Professor N'Sanna,
I think you've touched on the nub of the problem: namely, consent. But I also have to wonder, would you be similarly enraged at worms that ate your flesh after your burial or flowers that fed on the resulting dirt? Or for that matter, if you were unburied, birds that ate your flesh or even took locks of your hair to line their nests? And would you be enraged enough by the desecration of your remains that you would come back from the grave as a ghost to haunt those responsible, be they birds, worms, flowers, or a necromancer who decided to animate your body without asking your permission first? As Master Boen told me, either your angry enough about something to come back from the grave to rectify matters, or else you aren't. And if you aren't, then any anger you display is just a fit of pique with pretensions to something grander.
Beyond that, what exactly is the protocol when you find an unclaimed corpse? Bury it where you find it? Deliver it to the nearest graveyard serving whatever faith you guess it followed in life? Leave it for the vultures? Feed it to your cat? What?
I'm not talking about breaking into crypts or digging up graves, cases where you have a pretty clear idea you're interfering with the wishes of the dead (or at least their relatives), but merely the case of coming upon a body where it's anyone's guess what the deceased would want to be done with it, if anything. Unless of course you did a Speak with Dead, in which case you could not only ask the dead their consent, but bribe them into giving it, or even ask them what variety of undead they might like to return as, if any.
The other trouble with consent is faith, or to put a finer point on it, when your faith conflicts with someone else's consent. For all the talk about the evil of enslaving the dead, there's also a great deal of talk about the evil of free-willed dead, which seems to point to the true objection being to all undead, regardless of servitude or lack-of-same, and the complaints about slavery merely a rhetorical dodge.
If we establish that it's evil to turn a person into undead against their will, is the converse also true, that it is likewise evil to not turn a person into undead with their permission and possibly even express request, as perhaps set forth in their will? Or is violating these wishes good, because what's being objected to is creation of undead, regardless of questions of servitude or other opinions of the concerned parties?
If good is going to have any meaning beyond white hats, shiny armor and hollow words, it's going to have to be based on the matter of consent and the free will of the individual, including the right of the individual to make questionable choices, including but not limited to the right to become undead if one so chooses.
As for the matter of the bones of the dead and who they belong to, I was taught that it was wrong to break into anyone's house, including the houses of the dead, to steal what belongs to them, but anything that washes up on a beach after the spring thaw is free to claim, whether it's a ring, a sword or even a skull.
In the duration of one of my many sleepless nights pouring over scrolls and lore I have come across a sequence of correspondences you have participated in. In a letter you addressed to Thrane Von Dragostein (Necromancer of the 12th Order) you commented upon an inherit immorality inherit to the reanimation of a corpse. You asserted this, due in principle to a belief that a person "owns" their body. But this assertion fails to answer the prompt. If one "owns" their body and when it is taken from them (even after they have ceased to use it) then it is surely and undoubtedly an infringement upon that person's basic rights and they have suffered an injustice.
But are the ends to be foregone from consideration due only to the means? Say a Necromancer were to reanimate the body you were not using as a servant to save the lives of his/her friends and family? Is this an injustice? Is this not just as innocent as the midnight traveler who uses the light cast from your home to illuminate his path as he moves by? To use something, even if it belongs to you, in a way that doesn't affect you in a manner that benefits the greater good is not, in my opinion, an evil. It is illicit means used to bring about the greater good.
In addition to this, I did find something encapsulated in your letter that I found some truth in however. I have always found some strange similarities in the definition of conjuration and necromancy. When one "bestows life to a corpse" [Alexandar, A Short Essay on Necromancy, pg 1] does one not "conjure" a force? When a cleric heals does he not conjure a similar force to bring life back into the world? In this way I find the two schools to be very similar and find the evidence here presented to suggest a link between the two schools at a fundamental level.
This I do so humbly submit.
-Kain Mennoseph, Freelance Wizard and Professional skeptic.
I must admit that I have found this discussion rather intriguing, and I have gained new insight upon the workings of the most misunderstood branch of the Art.
With that said, I will now continue to add what insights I have to this fascinating discussion.
As it has been stated before, Positive and Negative Energy are just as good or evil as Fire. But, in the wider world, Positive energy is seen as "good", and Negative energy is seen as "Evil." Why? I believe that the supposed "morality" of these elements is based upon the fact that the world and members of this conversation... er... most of the members of the conversation... are animated by Positive energy. Negative energy negates Positive Energy. Thus, to most of us here, Negative energy is decidedly unhealthy.
The first thought that comes to mind is that anything that appears to strike unmercifully at our very life force must be evil, correct? And something that offers the ability to seemingly miraculously heal wounds and other ailments must be good, true?
Apparently not.
I am unaware if any here have been to the Positive Energy Plane, but I myself have. A harsher environment I have never experienced. The first few moments were pleasant, feeling like being wrapped in a warm blanket. I then felt energized beyond anything that I had ever felt. But the feeling grew. My body was crying out for some way to expend the energy, but it kept growing inside of me. It was then that my ward finally took hold, and stopped the rush of energy that would have eventually destroyed my body.
So, I have shown that Positive energy can be just as dangerous as Negative energy to beings that live off of Positive Energy.
When it comes down to it, the only thing that a person truly owns is their body. If my body were animated as your undead slave, I would be enraged.
I know that the next argument is that *I* would never know that the shell of my body is being used for your purposes. That is irrelevant. My body, dead or alive is not yours to make your slave.
Before I voice my opinion upon this statement, I would like to point out that potent magic can, in fact, make your body not your own. So, to begin with, this statement is flawed.
To continue, this claim that your corpse is for some reason special and should be treated as such based upon... what? While I regret that you would be displeased that I (or any other, for that matter) used your former shell as opposed to allowing it to decompose and become fertilizer, I still contend that it is morally neutral. Does a mage ask a piece of copper if it would mind if it was used for a spell? Of course not. Now, of course, your argument will be that a piece of copper is not a being, and it is not a fair analogy. Well, neither is a corpse. A corpse is, by definition, the remains of a being after it has departed from the mortal coil. You may claim that it is YOUR remains, but, quite frankly, I view it as under the laws of salvage. Note: This is not an endorsement to go grave robbing, as many members of this branch of the Art so often do.
In conclusion, I would like to thank all present for their insightful and enjoyable discussion,
Seeker Matthias
Traveler along the Way of the Unified Art
I lack the experience of many of you, but have something of a dilemma on my hands. Just a few days ago, I was a somewhat typical adventuring wizard, searching to learn more of the Art and questing with a few companions. All of us have attempted to follow the path of Good, as well as we may, and our path took us to a dungeon full of undead, controlled by a cleric who wished our deaths. We destroyed his minions and most of his allies, along with demons who may or may not have been his allies, but nevertheless attacked us and needed to be sent back to their abyssal lair. In the process, I lost a dear friend, and my other companions and I nearly met death as she did. I wonder if that would not have been preferable...
When searching the dungeon for any weapons or magic we could use, I discovered what appeared to be a spellbook, to the best of my knowledge and to the best magic I used to identify it. When I picked it up, though, it crumbled to ash in my hands. I find, now, that the book is transforming me into something much like a lich...
As best I know, Mystra has little to say about the undead, and at any rate, I am far from the nearest temple or shrine to the Lady of Mysteries, and the only other Mystran I know of nearby died before my eyes. My companions are not yet aware of my situation; one is a devout cleric of Lathander, so you may see the true nature of my dilemma.
I know not if my companions can accept me, but I am certain that many like them--like me--will not. I lack the power to contact my goddess, and it seems that my only potential allies may be those who I was destroying just a few days ago. And I know not what this new form I am taking will do to me...I have not changed in spirit, as far as I can sense, but I am told by many of you that the negative energy that is changing my body is undoubtedly corrupting me. Is this truly the price I must pay for a moment of foolishness? Am I inevitably going to be corrupted?
Am I so evil?