|
As the title says, one of my players has decided that a ghoul they fought four levels ago (though not too long in real time, maybe two weeks) might have had some useful info, and so has gone back into the hills to drag its body back to town, and get the clergy of the death goddess to Speak with Dead on his behalf.
(The PC cleric is away getting another PC raised, and our corpse-retriever doesn't know if the others will like what he hears).
I made him track the pieces, which I ruled had been dragged around by the crows, and he's got enough bits of it to satisfy the material focus.
Question is: the spell says it cannot be cast on remains that have been turned into an undead creature.
Fair enough, if the ghoul were active, the spell would do nothing. Not to mention, it would try to gnaw your arm of during the ten-minute casting time...
But what about a creature that was human, killed, rose as a corporeal undead, then got killed again?
Are these twice-killed bones considered viable remains for the spell?
Next game in three hours, don't know how long I can stall him!
Next game in three hours, don't know how long I can stall him!
I'm not easily stalled fella :-)
I think the remains are viable. At least I'm being inventive and not trying to suck up xp while the others are away... :-)
See you tonight!
|
|
... one of my players has decided that a ghoul they fought four levels ago (though not too long in real time, maybe two weeks) might have had some useful info, and so has gone back into the hills to drag its body back to town, and get the clergy of the death goddess to Speak with Dead on his behalf.
...
Are these twice-killed bones considered viable remains for the spell?
Next game in three hours, don't know how long I can stall him!
First of all -- ewww. Hopefully he'll be taking a bath soon after that.
Let's assume that it was a skeleton. And the PC didn't "re-kill" the skeleton but a different party did. Then your party finds the remains of John Smith. Would you allow it then?
I'd say allow it. As you pointed out, the spell says that because while the remains are undead, it would make it difficult (to say the least) to get the spell off. Besides, many undead are speaking to you -- something like "Brains..." etc.
After you kill an undead, I would say that the remains are the remains of the dead person. Possibly mutated a little, but still John Smith's remains. I'd allow it.
|
|
Thanks, Bill.
You may well say "Eeeewww"; I make this the seventh body they've hoiked round Diamond Lake/Cairn Hills, in a sack (do they wash the sack?), including one that was the cause of a bar fight, when they waved it around in the face of it's former friends....and these are the good guys...
I'm happy to allow it, if need be.
I just wanted to see if anyone knew of a definite reason not to, that may be hidden inside another rule.
So long as no-one's going to denounce me as a soft touch.
He'll still get the Will save to stay schtumm.
And there's the matter of convincing the Deadspeaker it's worth her time.
Not to mention two weeks of putrefaction. Depending on the climate and presence of vermin, there is a pretty small likelyhood of there being anything resembling a "mostly intact corpse" left...
|
|
Well, the acolytes dove into the sack, took out the skull and jaw, and left the rest, as if they've done this sort of thing many times before...
I hope he got the answers he wanted, since he's obligated to do a favour for the creepy goth-lady racial-supremacist diametrically-aligned death-cult of the witch-goddess.
I think the state of the corpse would make it extremely difficult for the spell to work. YMMV. But I think the concept itself is reasonably sound. Question is, what was inhabiting the corpse? A corrupted or damned soul? Or some sort of malevolent spirit?
Speak with Dead
You grant the semblance of life and intellect to a corpse, allowing it to answer several questions that you put to it. You may ask one question per two caster levels. Unasked questions are wasted if the duration expires. The corpse’s knowledge is limited to what the creature knew during life, including the languages it spoke (if any). Answers are usually brief, cryptic, or repetitive. If the creature’s alignment was different from yours, the corpse gets a Will save to resist the spell as if it were alive.
If the corpse has been subject to speak with dead within the past week, the new spell fails. You can cast this spell on a corpse that has been deceased for any amount of time, but the body must be mostly intact to be able to respond. A damaged corpse may be able to give partial answers or partially correct answers, but it must at least have a mouth in order to speak at all.
This spell does not let you actually speak to the person (whose soul has departed). It instead draws on the imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse. The partially animated body retains the imprint of the soul that once inhabited it, and thus it can speak with all the knowledge that the creature had while alive. The corpse, however, cannot learn new information.
Indeed, it can’t even remember being questioned.
This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature.
Interpreting the situation and the spell (see bold text) I would like to point out that the corpse would know nothing of its actions or observations while undead. Only from its previous life. And the previous undead state I would rule as the equivalent of being damaged, so they would only receive partial answers and partial correct answers on it's former life.
"This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature."
Were it me, I wouldn't allow it based on that.
The corpse had been turned into an undead creature.
After rethinking it I concur. This part of the spell says it wont work at all.
"This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature."
|
"This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature."
Were it me, I wouldn't allow it based on that.
The corpse had been turned into an undead creature.
I would not allow it either...and to answer the question above about if the party fields the "corpse" of a skeleton killed by someone else, I'd say it wouldn't work and the caster would know why.
Maybe this is even one of the reasons that necromancy is so abhorrent...
Contributor
|
I'd probably allow it, but use the undead creature as the source of the knowledge the creature has. So if the Castellan of the Gates knew the secret knock to enter the Catacombs of Plot, but was then killed by a ghoul and rose as a ghoul, you'd be talking to the ghoul, not the Castellan. If the ghoul knew the knock, then so would the corpse, if not, then tough luck.
So speak with dead on skeletons, zombies and other mindless undead probably has bad results, but even ghouls or vampires may have forgotten their former lives in your campaign.
|
|
Interpreting the situation and the spell (see bold text) I would like to point out that the corpse would know nothing of its actions or observations while undead. Only from its previous life. And the previous undead state I would rule as the equivalent of being damaged, so they would only receive partial answers and partial correct answers on it's former life.
That's fine, too. It was events from its former life he was interested in.
It's clear that the only events in it's undead life consist of sitting around and eating beetles.
Well, it doesn't say that it cannot be used on a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature, then turned back into a normal corpse again...
"This spell does not let you actually speak to the person (whose soul has departed). It instead draws on the imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse. The partially animated body retains the imprint of the soul that once inhabited it, and thus it can speak with all the knowledge that the creature had while alive. The corpse, however, cannot learn new information."
The undead creature bit is because when you cast this spell, the body is partially animated. An undead is fully animated. You can't partially animate a fully animated body. Doesn't make sense.
But a body that has been undead, but then chopped up, CAN be partially animated, but the level of animation is probably limited to SWD, because of the damage to the corpse.
That's how I'd read the rules anyway. Wanted to offer an alternate view, which is based in grognard logic (not that there's anything wrong with that logic, of course!)
But as I'm the player who wanted the SWD, I guess I'm biased :-)
Well, it doesn't say that it cannot be used on a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature, then turned back into a normal corpse again...
Actually, it kinda does:
"This spell does not affect a corpse that has been turned into an undead creature."
It doesn't say you can't cast it against an undead creature, it says you can't cast it against a corpse that was turned into an undead creature.
If you make a corpse undead, and then dead again, it still has been turned into an undead creature.
Actually, I agree.
Especially after reading the description for True Resurrection (which is very specific on this).
But the limitation doesn't gel with the rest of speak with dead's description further up (quoted in my last post) in a satisfying way.
And it says nothing about corpses of those killed by death effects - which fubars raise dead and resurrection!
But anyway, the session was three weeks ago now, and hard to retcon, so I suppose it doesn't matter.
But anyway, the session was three weeks ago now, and hard to retcon, so I suppose it doesn't matter.Shh, don't tell him the Priestess of Wee Jas was a ventriloquist!
You swine!
But it does, because they will keep trying the same trick in the future ... unless ...
<snip the cool stuff>
IMHO, you need to account for not allowing it in the future. Heck, turn it into a plot-hook, meta-plot or eventual story-arc capstone somehow.
That's cool! I'd nick that, but I'm the player :-) Snorter has an alternate alias that I don't look at for this kind of stuff, but he always forgets to use it!
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
ghoul they fought four levels ago might have had some useful info
In 3.5 there was a line in Speak with Dead that prevented you ever speaking with a body that had ever been Undead.
That may or may not be in the 3.p rules, but if it is then that would prevent it from working. I haven't checked the book.