// The first section of the book has been neatly written out, clearly a final draft///

Interviews with The Scholar - A study of necromantic ethics.

By Yvonne Rhune.

" I do not steal the corpses of beloved uncles to animate them. I do not send forth waves of undead to attack settlements. I am not mad, or insane. I am a humble scholar, who studies are very broad."

So says 'the Scholar', Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept, disciple of Saesred’etsu te Esoterotept and Thomas Aqvin. The purpose of this treatise is to investigate this man, and explore in detail his morality and methodology. His basic contention is that necromancy is not intrinsically immoral:

" I do believe that there is no great ill in using a goblin spirit to kill other goblins. I even believe that the living should be able to decide if they wish their remains animated or otherwise, and not a group of sneering moralists... Is it wrong to animate the bones of a senseless animal, or those of a criminal in order that he may repay his debt to society by useful labor, or to a loyal heart who is so dedicated to a particular cause that he wishes to contribute to it even when he is dead?"

Is necromancy wrong? A seemingly silly question with an obvious answer, but Aleczumberzeil's new arguments deserve serious consideration. I will probe this question in depth, and seek some sort of a moral resolution based on philosophical reason as well as the Scholar's actions, the implementation of his new necromantic notions.

Let us first examine motive. Where there is uncertainty, is there really a practical reason to dabble with the lines of life and death? This is the Scholar's line of reply:

" Yvonne Rhune: What is the advantage of the animation? Is it not true that approximately the same amount of study would enable the summoning of a magical creature of approximately the same power and usefulness, without blurring the barriers of life and death? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not believe that is correct at all, Yvonne. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: A simple incantation could produce a zombie that would hoe a field, or defend a gate. It would never tire, never require further attention... yet even the most skilled conjurers can only summon forth entities for a very limited time. Yvonne Rhune: I see. So the appeal of the animation is the duration of the resultant product? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I am not in the position of an advocate for anything, you must understand. But I do think this is a subject that should be discussed thoughtfully. And yes, I believe that and other advantages are notable. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not imagine that most entities from other planes would wish to be brought here and put to slave labor. Yvonne Rhune: I know of no one better to help me understand. What other advantages are there? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yet I do not doubt that there are many charitable individuals who would gladly will their remains to a more useful purpose than moldering in a crypt. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Furthermore, depending upon the nature of the task - Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Would it be practical or kind to send a celestial guardian to unclog sewer pipes? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Whereas a zombie would do so, faithfully, and with no unhappiness. "

The main advantage of undead is utility. They are strong, tireless and capable of simple tasks without boredom or mental fatigue. One might also suggest that having a zombie 'die' defending a gate is more moral than a living man giving up his life for the same act. Therefore we can conclude that indeed necromancy is useful. We must now assess if it is ethical.

Let us start with an early discussion on morality, not long after the Scholar arrived:

"Isom Ushanak: If I come upon it I will destroy it. If you come upon it then you will study it, though I would urge you not to bind the dead to this corrupted place. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well, you certainly seem very sure of that. I envy your surety... what about a being that desires to linger, as the walking dead? I have heard of tireless sentinels - Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: - who are so dedicated to their duty, that they have sought to have their flesh animated when they can no longer stand on their own. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Helmites, dedicated to the most worthy of causes. Isom Ushanak: To believe such is the sign of a corrupted mind. One whose path is lost to the whisperings of Eshowdow. One who is foolishly deluded by falsehoods. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: And what of criminals, those whose crimes are vile beyond reason, their flesh put to good use, making up for what they did as living beings. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I'm simply asking questions, in the spirit of study and contemplation. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: In truth, I have never truly been satisfied with the commonly held conception that when the spirit passes on, anything done to the remains that linger behind is of any significance. Isom Ushanak: There is no circumstances where it is good to bind a man to the maze beyond his proper time. When he is called before Ubtao then he must come or be doomed to the clutches of Eshowdow. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: If that is the case... what of the maggots? The rot that inevitably ruins any corpse when left unembalmed? Oona: Maggots are an essential part of the life cycle. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Maggots seem to feast on undead flesh as easy as living, in my experience. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Either way, it hardly seems to have any impact on the spirit, which is faithfully feasting in the realm hereafter, I am sure. Isom Ushanak: Foul magics do more then bind the body. They bind the soul to this realm. Oona: They do not bring corruption to a corpse, they break it down and return it to the earth to be re-used. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Do they really? When I stare into the eyes of a ghoul or ghast, I see no sign of any soul. Oona: Nor do I see a sign of a soul in the likes of you here and now. Isom Ushanak: I care not for the binding of obstacles. Yet to bind the soul of a sentient creature is a dark abomination and should not be considered by any that have not been lost to Eshowdow's whispers. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I truly do not. Again, I simply ask as a humble scholar to those who appear to have more experience in such maters... Oona: Begone from this place, you and your studies are not welcome here. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: ... but how can you be sure that the soul is bound? How do you truly know?"

Here we come to one of the key problems of necromantic morality. "What happens to the soul of an undead being". This question cuts to the heart of the ethical problems with necromancy . The effect of animation on the soul determines whether necromancy can be used as a righteous tool, or if it is intrinsically an immoral act.

Let us compare animation of the dead to murder. Murder is unambiguously a bad act. To kill someone is clearly an act that legal institutions, philosophers and virtuous deities have universally condemned for as long as recorded history. Murder is wrong because it takes someone away from this plane of existence, a plane that is really one big testing ground. Not only does the death cause potential hurt to the recipient and their friends and family, but it also removes the possibility of future action on this plane. Where a person may be hanging in the balance between a successful afterlife with their chosen deity, or failing in the eyes of their chosen lord, removing time on this plane can permanently determine the eventual fate of a soul.

That having been said, murder can clearly be a virtuous thing in the right circumstances. Rare are those who would not support the regicide of a murderous tyrant-king, or the swift removal of a pederast, if death is the only way to stop them. Here the murder becomes righteous because a probable greater immorality has been prevented. Even the most 'moral' of gods advocate murder at the appropriate time, although like many humans they shy away from the word, changing it to something more palatable, like execution.

So can be necromancy be classed with murder? Normally an immoral act, but one that if used at the right moment, can ultimately work for good? Aleczumberzeil submits that the body animated has no impact on the soul, which has moved on to its final resting place. His arguments are not bounded in evidential study however, instead he states " When I stare into the eyes of a ghoul or ghast, I see no sign of any soul". Oona retorts "Nor do I see a sign of a soul in the likes of you here and now", a strong retort to the experiential argument. The fact of the matter is that the spiritual ascension or hindrance of the part of sentient beings which transfers between here and the celestial planes (hereafter called the soul) is simply not examinable by occupants of this plane in their current format (with the possible exception of those engaged in very powerful scrying or plane walking magical practice). Without the capacity to look into the eyes of a being and get a spiritual reading one has to chart a cautious approach, for fear of accidentally doing great wrong.

The Latherdirtes submit that a soul of an animated being suffers in agonising torment on the plane of negative energy until such time as their body is put to rest. This argument is, unfortunately, also not immediately testable. It does pose some unusual theological ramifications. For example bodies can be animated long after they died, does this mean the soul travels to the celestial realm to serve their god on death, only to whisked away months, years or centuries later to suffer for a period of time on the negative energy plane? If so, I would imagine more wise men, interplanar scriers and religious leaders would advocate cremation, since it keeps the soul safe from sudden incarceration and torture, which otherwise remains a risk for the duration of the beings physical remains.

Unlikely though this set up sounds, we must give it credence if no proof can be found against it. After all, the whole theocratic system of our universe has many unusual and counter-intuitive elements (such as the damned status of newborns, too young or ill-educated to choose a deity). If the result of necromancy is prolonged agony, then a necromancer is by definition a sort of post-mortem torturer. Torture is clearly an immoral act, especially if it is enacted on one who otherwise would have moved on to their appropriate afterlife otherwise. While we cannot demonstrate that the Lathanderite arguments are sounder than the Scholar's, we must work with the worst-case scenario, and do no wrong. It is better to not animate the dead, only to find out their souls have moved on, than to accidentally torture thousands of souls for long periods of time accidentally.

Certainly most virtuous gods abhor necromancy, and the negative plane torture theory certainly would explain the different policies on murder and necromancy for the greater good. For example Torm, Selune or most of the noble gods would support the removal of a genocidal tyrant by lethal force, but they would not advocate the removal of such tyrant with non-lethal force but assisted by a summoned army of undead. Even when the often eccentric nature of our pantheon is factored in, this unusual moral take implies there is some missing element to our morality. Negative energy torture is the best candidate to fit that bill.

So what then of sentient undead? Even if we agree that a zombies' soul is tormented on another plane, the Scholar's companion and assistant, a quiet and shy mummy, is an example of a willing undead being. We might, however, remark that sentient undead are commonplace, such as vampires, liches, ghouls etc. There has never been any suggestion that the soul can be fractured, or co-located in any religious or metaphysical text known to the author. All standard teachings suggest the soul is in the body, or it is in the fugue plane, or in some afterlife. Since the soul is the motive force behind sentience, we must conclude that there are two distinctly different types of undead under the Lathanderite metaphysical model. We shall term one "slave undead" - these are the unreasoning undead, capable of only a parody of their former skills, desires and wants. The classic example is a zombie. Even where some beings possess complex functioning, such as magical practice, without independent intelligent thought, they are slaves of who or whatever summoned them. Even without a master, they lack initiative or cognitive power. We will assume it is these dead whose souls are absent, tortured on another plane of existence. On the other hand, we have what I will term "sentient undead". The classic example is a lich.

If the only problem with necromancy is the post-mortem torture, then a reanimation into a sentient form of undead does not appear to be unethical. This means that some of the Scholar's arguments hold water. The author cannot condone the use of unwilling criminals, or enemies, since one is condemning them to unnecessary torture as a 'slave undead'. As a 'sentient undead' one is delaying their divine judgment, something that is not the responsibility of mortals, but of gods. Even rothe, or other animals should not be animated, as one cannot rule out that their spirits likewise suffer on the negative energy plane. It is one thing to quickly slaughter a beast for food or safety, it is another to condemn it to long term suffering. However, without some further evidence coming to light, this text must conclude that under limited circumstances, specifically a sentient being converted into sentient undead, that there are no logical ethical problems.

This is not to say that there are not further theological issues. Just because something may not logically be unjust, does not mean that it is sanctioned by the gods. One is here locked into something of a dilemma. To animate a willing follower if a virtuous god is to imperil the eternal soul of that being. For example a follower of Torm will only invite score and harsh judgment from his lord for his animation, even with good intentions. With the current lord of the dead adamantly opposed to necromancy, this problem is exacerbated. Of course if one animates the follower of an less virtuous god who approves of necromancy, let us say for example Velsharoon, then the act is not longer imperiling the dead ones soul, as Velsahroon approves. Unfortunately it hard to imagine how animation of a sentient follower of Velsharoon can ever be a moral act, as the actions of this new undead will no doubt be as immoral as that of his god. It is for this reason, caught between the divine censor of the virtuous gods, and the immorality of the pro-necromantic gods, that ethical animation is such an extraordinarily rare phenomenon.

/// Two drawings are wedged into the notes here, one is from before the Scholar's necromantic hybridisation, one after///

/// The main text ends here, clearly not finished. However there are several more grouped pages of notes, under specific headings///

Actions and Justifications:

The act of relinquishing slaves to an illithid, even for knowledge, is clearly immoral, but can I link it to the perverting power of necromancy? It could be that necromancy clearly corrupts the user, but the Scholar might have been simply an unscrupulous man, selling the slaves for, say, texts on topiary magic, if that had been his chosen field of study...

" Bradoc Longpond: And there did the scholar Aleczumberzeil sell human slaves, six in number, to an illithid in exchange for gold and magical artifacts. Bradoc Longpond: I have made a report which you can quickly read. Bradoc Longpond: We should speak on the matter after you're done reading it. Yvonne Rhune: Alright. Bradoc Longpond: I wish for a second opinion, and one I value highly. Yvonne Rhune: Difficult. Bradoc Longpond: Did you understand everything in the report? Bradoc Longpond: It was sloppily written. Yvonne Rhune: I think so. You did not see the slaves sold, but you have reasonable grounds to suspect that they were. Bradoc Longpond: I know they were. Everything those two did suggests it so. Everything that happened. "

" Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: It was a dark place, that crypt. He was left weakened, poisoned, totally vulnerable. And yet I protected him with my life. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: The creatures that the illithid kept were tragic. They would have had absolutely no chance of surviving, of returning all the way to Sanctuary. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: They were likely riddled with implants, and even had one or two managed the difficult trek through the caves... populated by beholders, psionic hounds, formians, and other monstrosities... all of which was encountered. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: They would have had little of a life here. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Still, I would not trade in slaves. No. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I... Circumstances occurred that were grim, I admit. But I did what was necessary. I made a sacrifice, of myself more than any others. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: There are some causes that cannot be denied. Something was kept by the illithid of Ysinode. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Something that their possession of was a fair greater sin than anything we mortals could accomplish. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: You asked me of Po, well here is his primer. [here the Scholar produced a copy of Po's primer, in almost mint condition] Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: If I have acted in error, if I have acted in sin, Yvonne, then proscribe penance for me. But I acted in the name of the Lord of Knowledge. "

Yvonne Rhune: The thralls issue is a key one. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Please consider the following points. Yvonne Rhune: I think what is most damning is that you lied to Bradoc about it. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes, that's true. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I will simply say the following things - Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: The thralls were riddled with implants, and unlikely to survive or be accepted in Sanctuary. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I did not sell them, but simply allowed the transfer to take place. I could not have prevented it, I don't think, as the illithid had an elemental of enormous power. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I still feel guilt for what happened, and truly am committed to the eventual destruction of Ysinode and the freeing of all its thrall in time, using the methods I research. Yvonne Rhune: You received something of value in return, that is a sale of sorts. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: That is the other point. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: The knowledge I received was priceless. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: And in time will be used to free ALL the thralls of Ysinode. Yvonne Rhune: The illithid may have been buying inactivity rather than compliance, but it was a sale. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: But it is not accurate to call me a slaver. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I am not out there grabbing children to take them to Ysinode or Traensyr. Yvonne Rhune: I have not done so. But if I say you let ex-slaves under your protection be returned to a very powerful illithid in return for a potent necromantic book, it is likely to gain you more negative attention, not less. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: It was a perilous circumstance, and I did what I thought best.

"Yvonne Rhune: My question then. I was of the understanding that you argued that only animals and those willing pre-death should be animated? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Under most circumstances. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: However, Isom was warned very specifically of the consequences of his action if he tried to assassinate me in such a way. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: He chose his path, Yvonne. And I think he would admit it. Yvonne Rhune: So, if I am to try and summarize your ideology more accurately, it would be the willing, animals and enemies? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: If Isom was implacably opposed to this, he should not have acted in such a way as to bring it about. In a sense, he WAS willing. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: He could have gone down another path at any time. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Such as facing me in fair combat, or leaving me alone, or working against me in a way that does not involve a quick death from behind. Yvonne Rhune: Well, I think we can agree, given he stated over and over how much he despised you for "chaining the dead to this maze", that he did not wish it. He made an error of assessment. Not a theological choice. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: At any rate, Yvonne, until Sanctuary wakes from its stupor, and properly decriminalizes necromancy, and regulates the practice, I feel it is appropriate to animate those who have earned it, yes. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well, I did not desire to be murdered from behind. Yvonne Rhune: I do not think it would be unreasonable to imagine he thought he could kill you, would you not agree? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: But he did not respect my wishes on that subject. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: You are right, Yvonne. Yvonne Rhune: I am not defending Isom. I am merely trying to gauge as accurately as possible your motivations. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: He did not wish to be animated, and I knew that. Yvonne Rhune: Is it possible that your hatred for his skullduggery led you to a slightly more unpleasant path yourself? One that you might not have considered a few weeks ago? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Ah. You are testing the experiment, are you? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I am not a man of a completely rigid control, and never have been. I do not think I am yet manifesting the characteristics of a storybook evil necromancer. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I believe there is as of yet no evidence that this practice is a totally corrupting one. But we shall see. Yvonne Rhune: Your life progresses with or without my involvement. But I am trying to record your thinking accurately. Yvonne Rhune: Well, it is a note worthy change, if you have, within a few weeks, decided that those who oppose you are also legitimate targets for animation. Yvonne Rhune: Since, as you say, most of Upper disapproves of necromancy in general, it makes most of them targets? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: You are right. However I suspect the error was more in my lack of completeness in originally explaining the code, rather than deviating from it in any substantial way. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: No, I have no desire to animate citizens who simply are ignorant and prejudiced against the practice. I would change their minds, and have them come to wisely embrace it... but I am not here to impose myself upon any individual. Just as I would not have the masses impose their superstitions upon myself. Yvonne Rhune: I am not quite following you then. Is the animation a punitive thing? A punishment if you will? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: For Isom, it was a number of things. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: But chiefly a matter of following my word. I told him what would happen if he went down a path. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I would lose credibility if I was unprepared to follow through. Galadriel Eledhwen: I love this log in name so much Yvonne Rhune: Yes, but that does not explain -why- you told him you would animate him. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I suppose my code should be modified to say, 'if an individual is warned against doing such and such a thing, and told that if he does he will be animated, then I reserve the right to do so if he does such and such a thing' Yvonne Rhune: Yes, I understand you need to keep your word. Yvonne Rhune: But you made a decision that in this case, the path would lead to animation for Isom. This was still a moral decision. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Punitive, but only because the individual did not desire it. I would not particularly care to be animated into a simple zombie, but only because I do not seek to die. Yvonne Rhune: I mean, you could just send a letter to people saying, if you wear red on a Thursday I give my word I will animate you! Then to fulfill your promise you would have to walk around doing so! Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes, but that would not be reasonable of me. I am not a creature of rigid laws, Yvonne. I am simply a scholar trying to make his way through this world. Yvonne Rhune: I understand. But you are an advocate, indeed, the only advocate for your particular brand of morality. You care enough that you put posters up in Lower about it. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Do you find them persuasive? Yvonne Rhune: It is important for me that I understand it as well as possible. Persuasive? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes. Yvonne Rhune: It remains to be seen. You did not mention enemies on their, with the exception of goblins. Of course if you had written drow it might not have changed it much. Yvonne Rhune: If you are correct, and you can be moral and a necromancer, then I will be convinced. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well, I was attacked by the Watch. Yvonne Rhune: At the moment, I am shifting away, since I did not expect you to animate Isom. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Although I found it necessary to subdue them, I did not kill them, nor indeed even steal from them, other than a Watch key, which I took in case I was later arrested. Yvonne Rhune: Would you animate that Watchmen, if they attacked again? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Not unless they had received fair warning. Yvonne Rhune: I see. Yvonne Rhune: And what would make you decide to warn them? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not begrudge if a Watchman does their duty, but actions which demonstrate extreme disrespect... anything which I feel would be more of a personal vendetta rather than simply the course of one's duties... Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I may under such circumstances find it necessary to make this threat. Yvonne Rhune: If you were the mayor or equivalent of Sanctuary, we would have rothe and goblins guarding the gates. Who else? Criminals? Sentient attackers such as drow? Political opponents? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Those who had willed their bodies for such a purpose. I would be prepared to animate drow and goblins and other monstrous beings, also. Yvonne Rhune: But not criminals or political opponents? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not think that would be necessary. But it is an interesting question to ask. Yvonne Rhune: Sorry to be so persistent, but this is very interesting and important to me. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I would leave it to the people to decide. The corpses of criminals being used to perform useful labors for the benefit of the town is an idea with a certain elegance. "

Theories of the Machine and the gnomes.

I find the Scholar’s explanation purely speculative. The svifneblin reveled that when the council of Urdlen, known as the Appetite, descended in the lifts to the bottom of the shaft, they broke the lifts. As such none have been able to descend since then. Until such time as an investigatory party descends, or whatever now lurks down their rises up, we will have not idea.

Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: They are presented with a very vexing problem. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Their dead do not rest. The corpses rise and attack them. If they burn the corpses, they are haunted by spirits. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Being logical, mechanistic gnomes... they come up with a solution. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: A complex one, involving an enormous machine, so immense and powerful that it is capable of trapping the spirits of the dead, and safely storing them in mechanical monstrosities, so convoluted in their design that they can be controlled and safely put to productive purpose. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I think it a strong possibility that the animatrons that populate the ruins are not, in fact, powered by entrapped elemental spirits. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: But rather by the spirits of the gnomish dead. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: One can imagine that many gnomes would find the purpose of such a machine to be monstrous. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: And thus, we find ourselves at an explanation for the classic machinist-mole split, the cause of the war that caused Dunwarren to topple as it so dramatically did. Karlston Brass: They even embraced life in its various forms, that animalistic psuedo human state, full of life, vitality- Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: It must have seemed terrible to trap their spirits into machines. Karlston Brass: So unlike the decadence and depravity that would cause a man to rend a tear in the multiverse itself, to build such a machine. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well, I am not sure the tear was caused by this machine. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: My own theory is that it existed, and has existed.... the Machine was a solution to the problem caused by living in such proximity to it. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: A way to deal with the surplus of undead. Karlston Brass: It could have been a natural phenomena, true. A variety of ideas are supported by this. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Trapping the spirits into harmless machines so they do turn into harmful wraiths and zombies.

The Public Debate.

There is a lot here. I wrote down as much as I could recall. I think I had the Scholar on the back foot, which is promising.

Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Sanctuary, if it is to be successful, must seek a new way forward. We lack defenders, why not animate the bones of our enemies? Of animals? Of goblins? Of those who of their own free will dedicate their mortal remains to such a purpose Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: An army of the undead could crush Ysinode. Could free the slaves from the drow. Could dig or tunnel a way to the surface. Toman Vashan: Could it? It still is slavery and undead aren't as easy to control as you say. Toman Vashan: All of those undead could simply just go and kill us all and the merry necromancers would have more dead to raise, I guess. Senger Veneur: Why not raise the dead to do our bidding? Why not sell our souls to demons and devils who would provide us means to find what we seek in this coil? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: No, it is not slavery. And the unliving that have been responsibility animated, instead of left to rot and then rise due to the negative energy that soaks this place, are far less dangerous. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Demons and devils are another matter entirely. They are logically incredibly dangerous, untrustworthy, and evil. Senger Veneur: I'd say the same of the walking dead. Yvonne Rhune: But have you not said yourself, that to raise undead at this time in history is to put your soul in theological peril? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I have met monsters among the living just as I have the unliving. And the gentlest, kindest soul I've known is more than a little undead. Yvonne Rhune: Given the deity of death that rules at this time? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: It is a complication, Yvonne, but you misrepresent what I said. I do not fear Kelemvor, it is Jergal's own very temporary position at this time that is inconvenient. But I expect both he and the current office-holder will change their minds yet again in time. However - Yvonne Rhune: Are you suggesting that everyone here tries, as you do, to prolong their life to prevent his wrath? Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Those responsible for the animation could pursue this path. I would be glad to teach them. A special order of necromancers could be established to responsibly and legally control the use of undead in Dunwarren. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Or, alternatively, they could find a faith in which practices are not considered a disadvantage. To each their own in matters of religious faith, I believe. Yvonne Rhune: Yes, but by consenting everyone else would be tarred in the eyes of the Lord of the Dead. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not think so. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I am sure both Grumbar and Ibrandul would understand, anyway. And perhaps even Hoar. Yvonne Rhune: Perhaps is not enough when souls are in peril. Yvonne Rhune: It is one thing to die here, another to fail your god. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well, it is an interesting position you take. But I believe my idea still has merit. The unliving could be positioned well beyond the town itself. The town's general population could take advantage of their defensive work without imperiling themselves at all. Yvonne Rhune: And Kelemvor is not likely to take kindly to a member of a democratic city allowing a cabal of necromancers to practice freely. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Well. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I must admit your argument is far more persuasive than others I have been presented with. I shall consider the matter carefully, and consult with priests of different faiths to ensure this is right... but I do not think he would begrudge any innocent from living in a town that was safe, regardless of democratic practices or otherwise. Toman Vashan: You are suggesting, then, that only those 'deserving' are to be raised from the dead? Yvonne Rhune: I think it is pretty clear in his doctrine that any who raise the dead are fit only for utter destruction at the first possible moment. He is pretty explicit about it. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes, that is why there would be a specially licensed group to handle the animation and tending to the unliving. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: We are repeating ourselves. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: If people so fear the gods that they will not participate in this, I do not begrudge them that. But there is no good reason to endanger the safety of this town because of a handful of religious edicts from distanced, unconcerned over deities. Yvonne Rhune: It is just that you sought to make a distinction between selling a soul to demons, or say, the False Flame, and raising the dead. Yvonne Rhune: I am worried that the outcome would be the same. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: I do not think it would be. Devils and demons seek the souls of mortals for food. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: An unliving deep lizard patrolling the ruins, or a handful of unliving goblin defenders manning the gates, would represent no serious threat. Toman Vashan: It would set the precedent. Aleczumberzeil te Esoterotept: Yes, a precedent of safe, legal, responsible, monitored animation. Instead of what we have now, in which necromancers steal corpses and skulk in the shadows.