I was playing Morrowind, when I had two thoughts: Why, in Oblivion and Skyrim (the two modern games where it is legal in that province), all necromancers are evil (I have yet to find a necromancer that doesn't attack on sight), while in Morrowind, where it is actually illegal, there are quiet, peaceful necromancers (such as Sharn gra-Muzgob, who is part of the Main Quest). What about necromancy makes them evil in the later games? Or is it just a cliche that Bethesda fell into?

In Oblivion, it's because of Arch Mage Traven's view on Necromancy and is the cause of the ban across Cyrodiil, which rightly pissed off those who practiced it. Don't know much about Skyrim. But I assume the Nords despise those who wish to reanimate great Grandma Gertrude. In Morrowind, Dunmer honor their dead and even commune with them. So Necromancy there isn't viewed too harshly. These different cultures could affect the Necromancer's thinking. For example, since Necromancy is violently oppressed, Necromancers are more likely to attack on sight.

This doesn't explain why they are evil to people besides the Mages. They certainly don't act just pissed off, because if they wanted to they could just form their own guild with their own services. Rather than dealing with it calmly, they attack and torture their enemies. I have nothing against necromanceers, they have something against me.

I updated what I said while you were typing that response.

There's http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Selveni_Nethri in Skyrim, a necromancer who seems to genuinely care about her daughter. And http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Falion.

In Cyrodiil a lot of necromancers would have either just given the art up, or joined up with the Order of the Black Worm, which would have led them down further and further depths of depravity. Those that take a third option and go independent usually find themselves short of materials, forced to either rob graves or kill people. Or both. Both are very serious crimes in the Empire.

Outside of that, all of the sympathetic necromancers are pretty nice people that care about others. In fact, just about every sympathetic necromancer shows that they care for others. Selveni cares about her daughter, Falion cares about Agni, Aesliip cared about his village (and the rest of Solstheim), and the Dunmer care about their ancestors.

Edit: Fixed link

I think you mean to ask why they are hostile. They're evil because enslaving people after death simply isn't a nice thing to do. Even polite necromancers who don't attack are still evil. They're just evil and polite. And in answer to your question, it's because Bethesda put very limited man-hours into enemy types while making Skyrim and therefore necromancers are one of them.

This. In real life, do you believe in such a thing as a soul? I don't, but imagine for a second souls existed. Would you think good thoughts about someone who dug up your grandmother and made her his walking slave? Same thing goes for soul gems. Would you want to be imprisoned in a soul gem for an indeterminate amount of time.

Necromancy does not make a person evil and as for the Necromancy ban in Oblivion it was placed because Traven was an Arkay lover and his banishment on Necromancy was considered ignorant and often criticized by other Mages also the ban was only effective for those in the guild, Imperial law still claimed Necromancy was legal as well as the teaching of necromancy and the buying of dead prisoners or those who or their family gave consent to use necromantic arts on. Magic can't make a person evil, the power can be addicting which can lead one to do questionable things but never fully evil.

Also in Morrowind it wasn't seen as evil just seen as disrespectful toward their ancestors but it was still in use by many people, mostly Telvanni though and as for the Nords, while necromancy is legal in skyrim most nordic warriors or guardsmen will attack a Necromancy on sight due to their beliefs but by Imperial law its legal but the real reason is they attack is because most likely they think you would be useful to experiment on or for fear of being killed which is often the case.

Cause Arkay says so.

You seem to be confusing law and morality. I'm not sure what does count as "evil" if enslaving someone after death doesn't. Seriously, since enslaving people's souls is not wrong by these standards, or even questionable, what does count as wrong? What thing have you come up with which is worse?

There is at least one Necromancer in the College of Winterhold. It's tolerated there.

I only spoke to him twice, but he doesn't seem evil.

Necromancers who do kill and force the bodies to do their will are evil but who can say that Necromancy is the cause for them to be evil? They could be evil before they became Necromancers instead of the necromancy and power corrupting them. I still hold my stance that Necromancy in itself is not evil.

Since when does an act have to be self-corrupting to be considered evil? The point is that people don't want their souls and bodies to be enslaved, but necromancers do it anyway. And we don't really know what it feels like to be a enslaved spirit revenant, but it doesn't sound like a barrel of laughs. But then they might be somehow manipulated into enjoying it, if that makes the necromancer feel better and the revenant serve better.

I used to be a court-appointed child advocate. I've spoken to people who have done truly vile things who didn't "seem" evil. It's a very bad idea to base your opinions of whether someone is evil or not on words, rather than deeds.

Arkay is evil. And from my point of view, those who follow him are evil too.

What proof do we have that your average zombie or skeleton has the soul of the person they once used to be? Or, for that matter, is anything other than an animated corpse? Who cares what one does with a corpse? I mean, sure, a problem can arise when that corpse is used for malevolent purposes like we typically see it, such as causing harm to people, but where's the harm if it's used as a servant to progress the field of study? Necromancy has in it the potential to achieve full-on resurrection, as well as prolonging one's life well beyond a person's expected lifespan.

As far as soul gems are concerned, those are not Necromancer-exclusive. All schools of magicka make use of enchanting.

Necromancers are not inherently evil.

Well, regarding the soul, there is game lit that says the soul is there. And if that isn't enough for you, I killed a raised corpse today who said "thank you" as she collapsed into an ash pile.

Tis true, I have also heard a few poor souls utter "At last.." after I dispatched them.

Olaf manages to appear both in Sovngarde and in his tomb, as a draugr.

Edit: Of course, draugr might not be normal zombies. And one Nord (Golldir) mentions you are returning them to Sovngarde.

Necromancy is enslaving their bodies. Enchanting is enslaving their souls. Why are you trying to squirt your morality all over TES anyway?

Only a necromancer deals in absolutes. How exactly is preventing the souls of man and mer from being used without their consent evil?

That doesn't mean they have souls. That means they have brains.

Because such prevention means he is acting against freedom. And that in and of itself, is evil

My problem with Dragur is that they seem to be used interchangeably from regular zombies, where tombs that have had no dragur activity and have been maintained by a family, until suddenly have its dead raised when a wacky necromancer begins to play around with their corpses. It really should be examined by a case by case scenario instead of trying to apply it to every Dragur in game.

Such prevention also means he's protecting the freedom of the dead to not be enslaved against their will.