Undead always EVUL?

[Psyren]

If all of those spells are reacting to the same arbitrary property, and that property does not always align with philosophical moral judgements, then it is indeed a "false" positive. There is nothing wrong with the concept that there is a physical property of "Evil" that can be possessed by something that is engaged in a number of acts which would popularly be considered good.

But even from a philosophical/moral sense - if the entity you mention is only engaged in those "good acts" because you are ordering it to do so, is that truly a moral judgment?

The issue is that - either you enslave/direct them, or they do evil if left to their own devices. None of them, not one, will be good on their own. And that's on top of the possibility that they are making the world more evil just by being in it, inadvertently strengthening or propagating those of their kin who are not under your yoke.

That only proves that whatever creates the false positive is something all those abilities and spells pick up; it's what's on the sheet reveals the actual alignment.* You can Holy (and Unholy, poor gal) Word and Smite a Succubus Paladin four ways to Sunday, that doesn't change her alignment.
*Except PCs

Outsiders, even subtyped ones, are a separate issue. Whether truly evil or just made of some material that always pings that way, they are still alive/self-contained and not draining reality just by being in it.

[squiggit]

None of them, not one, will be good on their own.

Er... most intelligent undead can be good on their own.

[Psyren]

Er... most intelligent undead can be good on their own.

No - the "Always X Evil" tag ensures that most will not in fact do that.

Also, even if one did an individual or occasional good act, in the long term they would commit more evil than good (as well as the aforementioned problem of simply draining good from the plane by being in it.)

[Ravens_cry]

Outsiders, even subtyped ones, are a separate issue. Whether truly evil or just made of some material that always pings that way, they are still alive/self-contained and not draining reality just by being in it.

My point is spells that react as well to certain alignments that also affect undead and certain outsiders do not mean all are those alignments. If anything, Miss Succu-Paladin is a being that is ordinarily the physical manifestation of Chaotic Evil.
Besides, how is your average friendly neighbourhood ghost "draining reality just by being in it"? Sure, you don't want one to touch you, but if a Mister Rogers stopped by made of antimatter stopped by, I wouldn't want to give him a hug either. OK, I'd want to, but, come on, it's Mister Rogers.
Ghosts can literally can be any alignment in the book, but the above spells and abilities affect and detect them as if they were evil. Heck, baelnorn liches can be every alignment but evil, yet the above still affect them.
This is pretty much a textbook, dictionary example of a 'false positive'.

[ryu]

It's a freikin cow. Why would you need to atone for repeatedly killing a non-sapient creature? Do cows even have souls in DnD? And why would a paladin need PTSD counseling for doing something funny?

Who said anything about repeatedly killing it? I said healing not resurrection.

[Ravens_cry]

Who said anything about repeatedly killing it? I said healing not resurrection.

***
How is that better?!
"Yeah, I am not killing it; I am just keeping it alive so I can keep carving steaks from it. but I am not killing it, no siree."

[Jaxzan Proditor]

***
How is that better?!
"Yeah, I am not killing it; I am just keeping it alive so I can keep carving steaks from it. but I am not killing it, no siree."

I think ryu's point was that it was worse than what they thought it was.

[ryu]

I think ryu's point was that it was worse than what they thought it was.

Indeed. Why do you think I brought it up in an EVIL ACT discussion.

[Psyren]

Heck, baelnorn liches can be every alignment but evil, yet the above still affect them.

The above what? I don't think Smite Evil et al. would work on a Baelnorn, or a non-evil ghost for that matter.

This is pretty much a textbook, dictionary example of a 'false positive'.

Again, there is no false positive. What I'm explaining is why the vast majority of them (undead) are evil. The bare handful that are not... obviously, are not. (A tautology I know, but appropriate in this context.)

Ghosts can indeed be any alignment. They are one exception among multitudes of undead legions in D&D who do not have that freedom. And even when they themselves are not evil, the circumstances of their creation often are.

[squiggit]

No - the "Always X Evil" tag ensures that most will not in fact do that.

Well for starters, "most" is already a big step back from "all of them" in your previous post.

Second, not all undead have that caveat. Most templated undead aren't flagged as always anything. Necropolitans don't need to be evil. Hell even wight template doesn't necessarily force an alignment change.

Also, even if one did an individual or occasional good act, in the long term they would commit more evil than good

Unless, you know, the character in question isn't evil.

(as well as the aforementioned problem of simply draining good from the plane by being in it.)

Which, again, is not a given feature of the undead, merely a suggested variant a DM can adopt if he wants.

The above what? I don't think Smite Evil et al. would work on a Baelnorn, or a non-evil ghost for that matter.

They don't. Smite evil only works on evil. Good aligned undead still get pinged by detect evil though

[Gildedragon]

The above what? I don't think Smite Evil et al. would work on a Baelnorn, or a non-evil ghost for that matter.

Actually they do ping as evil to detect evil; a side effect of the undead type. They can be Exalted and they'll still ping as evil.

Smite evil might not work, but if it doesn't then it will not work on any non-evil aligned undead.

As to the Xeg-yi: they are manifestations of the negative energy plane; they are the plane coalesced into being. One in the material plane is... well a bit of the NEP in the material. If a thing causing the NEP to touch the material plane is intrinsically evil, the summoning of a Xegyi would needfully be an evil act.
But it isn't, so it ain't the case.

[Psyren]

Well for starters, "most" is already a big step back from "all of them" in your previous post.

I used "most" because you did, i.e. it was a direct counter to your own post: "most intelligent undead can be good on their own." Also, it's not a step backwards at all as the two are not mutually exclusive. If all of the birds in my aviary are owls, then most of the birds in my aviary are owls too.

Second, not all undead have that caveat. Most templated undead aren't flagged as always anything. Necropolitans don't need to be evil. Hell even wight template doesn't necessarily force an alignment change.

And here you're misusing "most" yet again. I searched the SRD for undead templates and got the following:

Skeleton: Always Evil
Zombie: Always Evil
Vampire Always Evil
Lich: Always Evil
Ghost: Any

That's 4/5 in the MM. I also searched LM:

Evolved Undead: Same as base undead (most of which are evil.)
Ghost Brute: Any
Gravetouched Ghoul: Always Evil
Mummified Creature: Always Evil
Necromental: Always Evil
Necropolitan: Any
Revived Fossil: Always Evil
Swarm-Shifter: Same as base corporeal undead (most of which are evil.)
Umbral Creature: Always Evil

So to correct your statement, most templated undead are indeed flagged as evil.

Unless, you know, the character in question isn't evil.

You can certainly houserule it that way, sure. I'm talking about the rules as presented.

Which, again, is not a given feature of the undead, merely a suggested variant a DM can adopt if he wants.

Without the explanations given in LM, you are left with no explanation at all but these creatures are still evil. Whether you explain it or not is actually irrelevant, I just happen to like the explanation because it makes sense. Without it, the rules are arbitrary, but they are rules nonetheless.

[golem1972]

The basic problem is that there are no behind the scene rules for writing any of the game mechanics. Many of the authors don't seem to have a good grasp of the way the games rules work or interact with each other and either can't or won't work with the other authors to make a consistent working model.

Mostly though, undead = icky, and icky = evil.

[Ravens_cry]

The above what? I don't think Smite Evil et al. would work on a Baelnorn, or a non-evil ghost for that matter.

Hmm, double check you are right on D&D 3.5 and 3.0 Smite Evil, but not on Detect Evil, which detects period Undead. regardless of alignment so that's still a false positive

Again, there is no false positive. What I'm explaining is why the vast majority of them (undead) are evil. The bare handful that are not... obviously, are not. (A tautology I know, but appropriate in this context.)

Ghosts can indeed be any alignment. They are one exception among multitudes of undead legions in D&D who do not have that freedom. And even when they themselves are not evil, the circumstances of their creation often are.

Any excretion disproves the rule.
Mummies are another undead whose alignment can vary in Core. So, yes, it is a false positive, as (Pathfinder) Smite Evil and Detect Evil (3.X including Pathfinder) do their job to undead period, despite the fact that quite a few (I am not saying all or even the majority) that, quite simply, are not evil.
How is this not a 'false positive' in these cases?

[Psyren]

Hmm, double check you are right on D&D 3.5 and 3.0 Smite Evil, but not on Detect Evil, which detects period Undead. regardless of alignment so that's still a false positive

Not necessarily; as I pointed out previously even non-evil undead are formed under evil circumstances. Ghosts do not come about due to being happy and peaceful souls; they come about due to sorrow, want, neglect etc.

Mummies are less absolutely evil than other types, but their creation is similarly grim. "Mummies are preserved corpses animated through the auspices of dark desert gods best forgotten...These horrid creatures are often marked with symbols of the dire gods they serve."

When such creatures show up on a Detect Evil radar, it is easy to surmise that it is nascent events such as these that trigger the alarm rather than the creature's ongoing alignment.

Any excretion disproves the rule.

Did you mean "exception" here?

And no, that does not follow. An exception by definition does not follow the rule. That does not mean the rule ceases to exist; it simply means there is a general case, and a handful of data points outside that case. The existence of Combat Reflexes does not invalidate the one AoO per round rule, it just means that those individuals with the feat get to ignore the rule.

Mummies are another undead whose alignment can vary in Core. So, yes, it is a false positive, as (Pathfinder) Smite Evil and Detect Evil (3.X including Pathfinder) do their job to undead period, despite the fact that quite a few (I am not saying all or even the majority) that, quite simply, are not evil.
How is this not a 'false positive' in these cases?

See above for mummy/ghost discussion.

[Deophaun]

I used "most" because you did, i.e. it was a direct counter to your own post: "most intelligent undead can be good on their own."

That most intelligent undead can be good on their own is not contradicted by the overwhelming vast majority of intelligent undead not being good.

[otakumick]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Monster Manual state that Always(alignment) tags basically mean a very large percentage are that alignment(meaning a smaller percentage would be anything but stated alignment)... I believe it also states that any sentient creature can have whatever alignment it wants(also that it can gain levels in classes but that's an elephant).

[JusticeZero]

I think we need to codify the theories at play here.

One theory states that alignment is an arbitrary construction which only loosely aligns with morality. For sake of discussion, I will define this as "Alignment Physicalism"
Of this, there is two schools: The Determinist school which indicates that being linked to an alignment will in various ways enforce behavior, and the Inconsequentialist school which believes that alignment has only accidental correlation with behavior in cases where an individual's physically determined alignment is set.

The other theory declares that many things that are specified in the system should not have the alignment absolutes that they are written as having, because free will allows anyone to change their behavior. As such, notes like "Always evil" should be treated as notes on the present state of the cultures from which they arise, from which individuals can then deviate. I will refer to this as "Alignment Archetypalism"

Each of these has a lot of assumptions that go along with it, but everyone seems to fall within those theories. I don't know that there is any way to reconcile them beyond just developing each one and having people recognize which one they currently prefer.

[squiggit]

I used "most" because you did, i.e. it was a direct counter to your own post: "most intelligent undead can be good on their own." Also, it's not a step backwards at all as the two are not mutually exclusive. If all of the birds in my aviary are owls, then most of the birds in my aviary are owls too.

Either way. The statement that "no undead can be good" is already demonstrably false. Mentioning backpedalling was on your behalf.

So to correct your statement, most templated undead are indeed flagged as evil.

Correction. Most undead templates force an alignment change. There's a significant difference and because of that difference it does nothing to contradict my point.

You can certainly houserule it that way, sure. I'm talking about the rules as presented.

There's no houserule required for there to be a good aligned undead though. Ghosts, Wights, Mummies and several others do not require an evil alignment. Baelnorns are good by default. Intelligent undead are... well.. intelligent, and therefore are not beholden to any alignment (though their templates sometimes force an alignment change). There's no houserule here.

I just happen to like the explanation because it makes sense. Without it, the rules are arbitrary, but they are rules nonetheless.

The thing is the rules don't support this explanation. None of your theories about undead congregating causing more undead to spontaneously animate or undead causing damage to life by existing actually exist as rules. Atropus' sign is close, but again that's the work of a single specific entity.

[Raven777]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Monster Manual state that Always(alignment) tags basically mean a very large percentage are that alignment(meaning a smaller percentage would be anything but stated alignment)... I believe it also states that any sentient creature can have whatever alignment it wants(also that it can gain levels in classes but that's an elephant).

But I do not think the template states "Vampire : Always Evil". Rather, it merely states "Vampire : Any Evil". Which means that the MM's dispositions about the word "always" might not apply. Just saying "Vampire : Any Evil" actually sounds rather absolute.

[otakumick]

But I do not think the template states "Vampire : Always Evil". Rather, it merely states "Vampire : Any Evil". Which means that the MM's dispositions about the word "always" might not apply. Just saying "Vampire : Any Evil" actually sounds rather absolute.

That is a fair point, however vampires are also sentient so they should be able to change their alignment(though they may not want to).

[squiggit]

But I do not think the template states "Vampire : Always Evil". Rather, it merely states "Vampire : Any Evil". Which means that the MM's dispositions about the word "always" might not apply. Just saying "Vampire : Any Evil" actually sounds rather absolute.

It is absolute. Adopting the vampire template changes your alignment to evil.

[Raven777]

It is absolute. Adopting the vampire template changes your alignment to evil.

Which is why you tell your Simulacrum-of-yourself assistant to get the Helm of Opposite Alignment ready before asking your Control-Undead-Vampire assistant to proceed with the biting. Experimental procedures are made to be followed, folks!

[Vhaidara]

Which is why you tell your Simulacrum-of-yourself assistant to get the Helm of Opposite Alignment ready before asking your Control-Undead-Vampire assistant to proceed with the biting. Experimental procedures are made to be followed, folks!

Can I sig this?

[Raven777]

Sure

[Ravens_cry]

If it's all the same to you, Psyren, I am quitting this discussion. Take that as you will, but I would prefer not continue this to the point of us, likely me, said something silly, and it's rapidly approaching that point.
All the best, and hopefully our next discussion will be more fruitful.

[Psyren]

His post is right after mine, so I'll just say this: I have no idea if Deophaun was addressing me as I put him on my ignore list months ago.

The thing is the rules don't support this explanation.

Other than the rulebook passages I quoted? I didn't write Libris Mortis, WotC did.

But the beauty of this situation is that the rules don't have to support anything. Skeletons are evil, full-stop. Vampires are evil, full-stop. If you don't like the explanation they provided, feel free to invent your own, but the statblock does not change regardless.

If it's all the same to you, Psyren, I am quitting this discussion. Take that as you will, but I would prefer not continue this to the point of us, likely me, said something silly, and it's rapidly approaching that point.
All the best, and hopefully our next discussion will be more fruitful.

To you as well.

[Vogonjeltz]

Fire tends to do that as well.

So, creating a bunch of skeletons to work in a place hostile to living creatures brings harm to living things?

1) fire itself is basically alive, but not it doesn't harm all living things. I'd also mention that according to LM negative energy eats fire, like all life.
2) desecration of corpses is evil, yes, as is bringing into form negative energy.

By your first premise, no form of energy can be Good, because they all lack compassion and respect, since they are merely forms of energy. This makes positive energy Evil as well. In fact, just about anything is Evil, since there are many things that harm living beings or lack compassion for them. By your logic, the Sun is Evil.

Negative energy is neutral because its plane is not Evil-aligned or good-aligned. If it was inherently either of those, then it's plane would be aligned in that direction.

There are uses to negative energy besides harming living beings.

Positive energy heals, it's inherently good. LM covers compassion and clearly states that while sentient undead understand compassion, they don't care about it. Like sociopaths.

No. Good is compassion and respect for all living things.

Besides, negative energy is no more harmful to life than any other type of energy - including positive energy. There exist spells that heal living creatures with negative energy. There also exist spells that harm living creatures with positive energy (plus, go have a vacation in the positive energy plane, see how much you last before you get healed to death).

Positive energy isn't harmful, it's the positive energy plane that contains such concentrated amounts it isn't safe (much as water provides life, but being immersed in water is generally fatal after long enough.)

[Rubik]

Positive energy heals, it's inherently good. LM covers compassion and clearly states that while sentient undead understand compassion, they don't care about it. Like sociopaths.

Negative energy also heals, so it's also "inherently good" by that metric. It just doesn't heal the same things that positive energy does.

And sentient undead that aren't Evil very well understand and care about compassion. It's the Evil ones that don't. That's why they're Evil.

Positive energy isn't harmful, it's the positive energy plane that contains such concentrated amounts it isn't safe (much as water provides life, but being immersed in water is generally fatal after long enough.)

"Positive energy isn't harmful. Too much of it can and will kill you, very, very messily. But it's not harmful."

Riiiiiiight.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Positive energy heals, it's inherently good. LM covers compassion and clearly states that while sentient undead understand compassion, they don't care about it. Like sociopaths.

Negative energy heals as well. While undead may understand compassion, something like negative energy doesn't, so it would not be Evil.