Breath of Life Within 1 Round After Dying Twice (Complicated)


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

We had a player die to a mohrg, raise as a fast zombie, then we destroyed him immediately and the healer was able to use breath of life on him within 1 round of his original death.

The spell is not meant to be able to restore an undead creature that has been destroyed, but the wording has a player convinced we can't save the downed player:

Breath of Life wrote:
Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

Opinions?


Once killed again the fast zombie is no longer an undead creature. It's just a corpse. Breath of life should work.


That text is there to stop you simply using Breath of Life on the Zombie to resurrect the character. The Zombie must first be destroyed (which you did).

Rules As Intended Breath of Life is probably not meant to be used this way (just judging by the name "Breath of Life"), but Rules As Written I agree with avr, it will bring the character back.

Shadow Lodge

It can't bring undead creatures back to life, he was most recently an undead creature. So no, doesn't work. Raise dead is the same level and also includes wording that it won't bring someone who was turned undead back to life.

Saying once killed he's no longer an undead would mean that sentence about not bringing undead back to life would never apply and that makes no sense.


gnoams wrote:

It can't bring undead creatures back to life, he was most recently an undead creature. So no, doesn't work. Raise dead is the same level and also includes wording that it won't bring someone who was turned undead back to life.

Saying once killed he's no longer an undead would mean that sentence about not bringing undead back to life would never apply and that makes no sense.

The line about not bringing back an undead creature is more along the lines of "You can't just cast this spell and undo them being an Undead creature nor can you use Raise Dead to bring back an Undead creature AS an undead creature."

But if the character was killed, turned into a zombie, then killed again AND Breath of Life was applied before the 1 round was up, it's fair game. Raise Dead can't do this, but Breath of Life can since it's not Raise Dead(Which we can infer from Resurrection which specifically calls out destroying an undead then resurrecting them being something Resurrection can do).


Interesting question, is the BOL trying to bring the body back to life(it's original state) or undeath(it's last state)? I originally wanted to say "No, BOL cannot do this", but I can see how you could interpret it the other way. I do however have an observation, the body has 2 sets of "death wounds"/damage on it, 1 when alive and 1 as a zombie. Assuming it would work, how much damage would BOL need to heal?


Valandil Ancalime wrote:
Interesting question, is the BOL trying to bring the body back to life(it's original state) or undeath(it's last state)? I originally wanted to say "No, BOL cannot do this", but I can see how you could interpret it the other way. I do however have an observation, the body has 2 sets of "death wounds"/damage on it, 1 when alive and 1 as a zombie. Assuming it would work, how much damage would BOL need to heal?

Breath of Life can't bring undead creatures back to life as undead creatures. It specifically states this;

Breath of Life wrote:


Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

Rather, the discussion would be referring to bringing back the character to normal life.

Since all Breath of Life requires is

  • Creature died within 1 round
  • Apply 5d8+x healing to negative total that killed said creature
  • If the healed creature’s hit point total is at a negative amount less than its Constitution score, it comes back to life and stabilizes at its new hit point total.

I'm inclined to say the rules appear to allow it if one manages to both slay the zombie and apply the Breath of Life before a round has elapsed since the character's first death.

The Zombie's status after being slain is irrelevant since the condition of the body before becoming a Zombie has no bearing on it's own HP. Likewise, once a creature is dead, you can't reduce the negative amount even further since a dead body is effectively an object. It no longer has an HP total[Barring Breath of Life's special rules].


The only issue I can see is the following:

Undead traits wrote:
Not at risk of death from massive damage, but is immediately destroyed when reduced to 0 hit points.

I've always interpreted "immediately destroyed" as to mean it turns to dust but I know not all DMs read it that way. The only reason BoL wouldn't work in this case is because there is no body to cast the spell on.

If there is still a body though, then I agree with others BoL should still work so long as it's still within 1 round of the original death of the character. Having the body get up and dance around via negative energy doesn't add "extra time" to cast BoL unless such a thing is explicitly stated.

As for which HP total to use, I would probably be nice and say that it's whatever neg HP the character was at when they originally died. I would claim that the damage dealt against the zombie was against the evil force animating the body not the body its self.


The spell don't work simple as that, BoL Say it will resurrect the slay target no more that 1 round, but the target dies more that 1 round if you considerate all the round that he was undead. So I'm this case only rise dead can be used


Zepheri wrote:
The spell don't work simple as that, BoL Say it will resurrect the slay target no more that 1 round, but the target dies more that 1 round if you considerate all the round that he was undead. So I'm this case only rise dead can be used

I get the impression from the OP it was something like

Initiative Order

Character A
Mohrg
Character B
Character C

Character A attacks the Mohrg in melee range.

The Mohrg attacks back and drops Character A putting them at -25 hp this is lower than the character's con stat and so they are dead. The Mohrg's ability triggers causing character A to immediately turn into a zombie as per it's create spawn ability.

Character B attacks the Character A zombie killing it.

Character C casts breath of life on Character A since it's still within 1 round of Character A dying, though they were a zombie very very briefly between when they originally died and now.


Scavion wrote:
The Zombie's status after being slain is irrelevant since the condition of the body before becoming a Zombie has no bearing on it's own HP. Likewise, once a creature is dead, you can't reduce the negative amount even further since a dead body is effectively an object. It no longer has an HP total[Barring Breath of Life's special rules].

I disagree with this. You can damage objects, the rules say you can ( https://www.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?Name=Smashing%20an%20Object&Category= Breaking%20and%20Entering ). What the rules don't say is how damaging an object that used to be a living creature interact with spells like BOL or how much damage it takes to destroy a body (like say through cremation).

In the case of the human-dead body-zombie-dead body-BOL chain, I think it would be reasonable to say BOL would need to heal how much damage the human took + how much damage the zombie took.


LordKailas wrote:
Zepheri wrote:
The spell don't work simple as that, BoL Say it will resurrect the slay target no more that 1 round, but the target dies more that 1 round if you considerate all the round that he was undead. So I'm this case only rise dead can be used

I get the impression from the OP it was something like

Initiative Order

Character A
Mohrg
Character B
Character C

Character A attacks the Mohrg in melee range.

The Mohrg attacks back and drops Character A putting them at -25 hp this is lower than the character's con stat and so they are dead. The Mohrg's ability triggers causing character A to immediately turn into a zombie as per it's create spawn ability.

Character B attacks the Character A zombie killing it.

Character C casts breath of life on Character A since it's still within 1 round of Character A dying, though they were a zombie very very briefly between when they originally died and now.

That's exactly the case. The question is whether Mohrg's turn causes Character C's turn to fail, on account of the brief moment of "turned into an undead" status.

In contrast to most posters here, I'm going to take the position that breath of life will fail in this case, based on what breath of life does and the target's status.

Spoiler:
This spell cures 5d8 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +25).

Unlike other spells that heal damage, breath of life can bring recently slain creatures back to life. If cast upon a creature that has died within 1 round, apply the healing from this spell to the creature. If the healed creature's hit point total is at a negative amount less than its Constitution score, it comes back to life and stabilizes at its new hit point total. If the creature's hit point total is at a negative amount equal to or greater than its Constitution score, the creature remains dead. Creatures brought back to life through breath of life gain a temporary negative level that lasts for 1 day.

Creatures slain by death effects cannot be saved by breath of life.

Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

So let's look at the turn order again.

1. A attacks the Mohrg.
2. The Mohrg attacks A, reducing him to -25 hp. A is now a FAST ZOMBIE.
3. B kills A. A is now a CORPSE OF A FAST ZOMBIE.
4. C casts breath of life, targeting A.

We know that 3 is true. When someone dies, is turned into undead, and dies again, the corpse does retain the undead type (and the template that granted it, if any); this is why Raise Dead and Reincarnate fail when used on the corpses of undead. Resurrect spells get around this by virtue of being resurrect spells, but that's another story.

Breath of Life isn't a raising spell. It's a cure spell that has a special ability to be castable on dead targets, as long as they've been dead less than 1 round.

As such, what happens is that C affects A with 5d8+level:25 points of a cure spell. Since A is currently a corpse of undead, he is still undead; as such, because he's a valid target for the spell, he takes full damage from the positive energy attack.

After C's turn, A is a corpse of a fast zombie with like -47 hp. And still most certainly dead.


Sandslice wrote:
We know that 3 is true. When someone dies, is turned into undead, and dies again, the corpse does retain the undead type (and the template that granted it, if any); this is why Raise Dead and Reincarnate fail when used on the corpses of undead. Resurrect spells get around this by virtue of being resurrect spells, but that's another story.

I'm not sure that the raise dead and reincarnate spells really help specify if the corpse retains the undead creature type. So, I looked to see if I could find something that targeted undead corpses specifically and I was able to find something.

The spell Geb's Hammer gives surprising insight into this situation and to the question of what happens when an undead creature is "destroyed".

To start with Geb's Hammer only works on undead corpses, which clearly confirms that there is in fact a difference between a non-undead corpse and undead corpse. Namely that it retains it's undead creature type even in death. It also tells us that the state of the undead creature's body depends on how it was killed. Undead are in fact vaporized like I thought, but only when killed using positive energy or effects that specifically turn things to dust (such as disintegrate). If you hack a zombie apart with an axe you are left with a dead zombie that is a collection of body parts. The zombie's corpse can not be raised, reincarnated or even animated only because those spells state that it can not be. Any effect that works on corpses can otherwise be used.

In the scenario specified. By the rules I agree that breath of life wouldn't work. In fact it would actually end up vaporizing the corpse because it deals positive energy damage to undead creatures.

Mohrgs just got a lot nastier.

edit: Breath of Life doesn't state that it's positive energy, but it's strongly suggested by the fact that it states that it damages undead like cure spells do and cure spells damage undead because they are positive energy.


Scavion wrote:

Breath of Life can't bring undead creatures back to life as undead creatures. It specifically states this;

Breath of Life wrote:


Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

Rather, the discussion would be referring to bringing back the character to normal life.

I see nothing that specifically states can't bring them back to being undead, and in fact talks about bringing them back to LIFE. It shows to me the exact opposite.

I'd say doesn't work. This spell won't bring an undead back to life. Undead at 0 hp are simply gone.


Cavall wrote:
Scavion wrote:

Breath of Life can't bring undead creatures back to life as undead creatures. It specifically states this;

Breath of Life wrote:


Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

Rather, the discussion would be referring to bringing back the character to normal life.

I see nothing that specifically states can't bring them back to being undead, and in fact talks about bringing them back to LIFE. It shows to me the exact opposite.

I'd say doesn't work. This spell won't bring an undead back to life. Undead at 0 hp are simply gone.

True the only spell that can return them to life is resurrection and true resurrection since this spell can reconstruct the body, also reincarnated can bring to life by creating a new body (of the same species or different race)


I think the thing everyone is missing is that when you "kill" and undead, they don't become a corpse, you destroy the body. As in the body is not valid for any revival short of True Resurrection. That's just a simple feature of being undead.

There's other lore stuff that you basically can't be brought back from Undead short of True Resurrection or a Miracle/Wish because of how becoming and undead messes with your Soul and the Boneyard (why Pharasma hates them), but that's not represented in rules.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
I think the thing everyone is missing is that when you "kill" and undead, they don't become a corpse, you destroy the body. As in the body is not valid for any revival short of True Resurrection. That's just a simple feature of being undead.

That's incorrect.

Spirit Speaker (Sp): At 8th level, a haunt collector with at least one haunted implement can commune with the spirits once per day. By holding a seance for 10 minutes, he can ask questions of a destroyed undead or a neutralized or destroyed haunt. To use this ability on a corporeal undead, the haunt collector must have the creature’s head in his possession. For a haunt or incorporeal undead, this seance must be held in the haunt’s location or where the incorporeal undead was destroyed. Treat this ability as speak with hauntACG or as speak with dead (but affecting only destroyed undead rather than only corpses), using the haunt collector’s occultist level as the caster level. He can perform this seance one additional time per day at 12th level, and again at 16th level and 20th level.

This ability replaces outside contact.

Sorry if this sounds abrupt and rude, I don't have much time today so I'm just posting quickly.


I don't know about you, but just having the head isn't going to make a functioning Humanoid when you revive them. The body being destroyed doesn't mean it becomes dust, doesn't mean its hacked in pieces, or any specific type of damage. It just means that whatever damage it took is so bad that if you cast the spell, you might bring the spirit back, but it will instantly die again because the body cannot keep itself alive to house the spirit.

In the case of a head that has been talked to with ability, there is no heart to pump blood, no oxygen to fill the blood, likely no blood as its been a severed head for a while now, and no organs to break down food to fuel the brain. Since a corpse is an object, you can't cast regeneration on it, so you need a new body which is what the (True) Resurrection spell does. (There's also some funky lore that to me implies only True Resurrection works on former undead, but I won't apply that blanketly here.)


Destroyed mostly means that 'no, undead don't fall unconscious and you can't bring them back to unlife'. There's a body there in this case and no particular reason to believe it's much deader than any other body that's been punched to death by a mohrg. There might be a few more HP needed to be healed from the sword-wound that took the fast zombie down, but it's not like the body's necessarily been dismembered.


Destroyed is simply the short term used to indicate that an Undead does not fall to negative HP. They hit 0 and they're done. They do not die because they weren't really alive and so cannot be reduced to a "Dying" state like living creatures can be. So they are destroyed. Unless an effect specifically states that it leaves the body in a state unable to be raised, a simple attack or damage roll does not do so.

Keep in mind that Raise Dead has the body condition limitation, but not Breath of Life. Barring Death Effects, Breath of Life could hypothetically bring back someone who lost their arm...sans the arm of course.


But can it change their type?

An undead is still undead subtype right? This spell days undead arent brought back.

So unless killing them reverts them back to elf dwarf whatever... it doesnt work. It's an undead. A destroyed undead.

In fact MrCharisma even gives us all we need to determine it.

"he can ask questions of a destroyed undead or a neutralized or destroyed haunt. To use this ability on a corporeal undead, the haunt collector must have the creature’s head in his possession. For a haunt or incorporeal undead, this seance must be held in the haunt’s location or where the incorporeal undead was destroyed. Treat this ability as speak with hauntACG or as speak with dead (but affecting only destroyed undead rather than only corpses)

So here we understand that having the creatures head, it's called destroyed undead. Still undead subtype.

In the second section, the quote tells us destroyed undead are not corpses. They are destroyed undead.

Undead subtype? No breath of life.

Somehow MrCharisma gives us a quite that directly proves himself wrong and the argument of the fact undead are destroyed undead and not corpses is correct.


Cavall wrote:
Somehow MrCharisma gives us a quite that directly proves himself wrong and the argument of the fact undead are destroyed undead and not corpses is correct.

I actually did think that myself after posting it.

And if you follow that an zombie body and a human body are different things then yes that logic applies.

But if you start from the assumption that zombie bodies and human bodies are just "corpses" with no difference then the text I quoted reads more like this:

Quote:
Treat this ability as speak with hauntACG or as speak with dead (but affecting ONLY destroyed undead rather than only corpses dead humans AND destroyed undead.).

So that part of the text actually fits either argument. You're not strictly wrong in your interpretation, but you're not strictly right either. That passage of text can't really prove either argument.

What I was trying to get across is that destroyed undead aren't inherently disintegrated or anything like that, and the text I quoted shows that. When it says that destroyed undead leave at least a head behind.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
I don't know about you, but just having the head isn't going to make a functioning Humanoid when you revive them. The body being destroyed doesn't mean it becomes dust, doesn't mean its hacked in pieces, or any specific type of damage. It just means that whatever damage it took is so bad that if you cast the spell, you might bring the spirit back, but it will instantly die again because the body cannot keep itself alive to house the spirit.

That's possible, but not an inherent truth. Yes if you've cut of it's head it's unlikely to be happy with a resurrection. But if you've caved in it's chest with a hammer and you happen to have a SPELL or something that can heal that kind of thing then you should be good to go.

The only quote I could find about the state of a dead body is this:

In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how he died, has hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score.

And I don't think it gives us much to work with.

(Sorry it took me a little while to find the quote for this one, I thought it's be in "Conditions" or something)


MrCharisma wrote:
Cavall wrote:
Somehow MrCharisma gives us a quite that directly proves himself wrong and the argument of the fact undead are destroyed undead and not corpses is correct.

I actually did think that myself after posting it.

And if you follow that an zombie body and a human body are different things then yes that logic applies.

But if you start from the assumption that zombie bodies and human bodies are just "corpses" with no difference then the text I quoted reads more like this:

Quote:
Treat this ability as speak with hauntACG or as speak with dead (but affecting ONLY destroyed undead rather than only corpses dead humans AND destroyed undead.).

So that part of the text actually fits either argument. You're not strictly wrong in your interpretation, but you're not strictly right either. That passage of text can't really prove either argument.

What I was trying to get across is that destroyed undead aren't inherently disintegrated or anything like that, and the text I quoted shows that. When it says that destroyed undead leave at least a head behind.

Glad you responded, MrCharisma.

And just like you I had thought about it after I posted. And I also reached the point where I could read it like that. It DID seem like a valid reading. But the I realized I could also read it like

Quote:


speak with dead (but affecting ONLY destroyed undead rather than only corpses which are dead humans and not destroyed undead).

See the problem lies in if we ignore one "only" we have to ignore both, which makes no sense, and also isnt helpful to ignore anything. Therefore we have to leave it as only this and only that.

Like that spell that heals contructs. It heals only them and no other thing, and the normal heal does mostly anything but them. So only this and only that means they are 2 separate groups with no crossover. That, in the end, is the way I chose to read it, as it was the way that didnt ignore one thing to emphasis the other.

The only thing we know is that the subtype changed upon death. That subtype is not lost upon being destroyed. Therefore the spell doesnt work with that subtype so it doesnt heal.

That's the best I can work out.


MrCharisma wrote:
AwesomenessDog wrote:
I don't know about you, but just having the head isn't going to make a functioning Humanoid when you revive them. The body being destroyed doesn't mean it becomes dust, doesn't mean its hacked in pieces, or any specific type of damage. It just means that whatever damage it took is so bad that if you cast the spell, you might bring the spirit back, but it will instantly die again because the body cannot keep itself alive to house the spirit.

That's possible, but not an inherent truth. Yes if you've cut of it's head it's unlikely to be happy with a resurrection. But if you've caved in it's chest with a hammer and you happen to have a SPELL or something that can heal that kind of thing then you should be good to go.

The only quote I could find about the state of a dead body is this:

In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how he died, has hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score.

And I don't think it gives us much to work with.

(Sorry it took me a little while to find the quote for this one, I thought it's be in "Conditions" or something)

If anything, all that tells us is that you are always within enough negative HP to be brought back to life with breath of life, assuming you are also a valid target.

Being a destroyed undead is still enough to make you an invalid target. Resurrection is the lowest level spell that allows one to bring someone back from being undead, as it essentially either fully regenerates the body from a tiny shred (or in the case of True, from nothing), while breath of life and raise dead both use the body as it is when you touch it. Because neither of these spells say you can bring back someone who was "an undead creature and then destroyed", you can't with Breath of Life.

The simple headcanon that comes out of this what I was saying. An undead doesn't a set of working lungs in his torso, he just has to have a torso capable of movement. What's the exact limitations of that? Don't ask too many questions, moving on. But once you have damaged enough of an undead to make it "destroyed" you have damaged it in a way that would be tantamount to it being a quadriplegic, deaf, blind, and mute vegetable if it were actually alive. You can't reanimate it again because it simply doesn't have enough bodily function to be actually animate, so stuffing a living soul back in it doesn't change that either.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
MrCharisma wrote:

The only quote I could find about the state of a dead body is this:

In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how he died, has hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score.

And I don't think it gives us much to work with.

(Sorry it took me a little while to find the quote for this one, I thought it's be in "Conditions" or something)

If anything, all that tells us is that you are always within enough negative HP to be brought back to life with breath of life, assuming you are also a valid target.

You missed the "or less than" (emphasized). I did the same until I re-read it yesterday, so apparently it doesn't even tell us that much =P

So here's why I'm not following you:

I can't see anything in the rules that actually distinguishes a difference between the corpses, dependant on whether they've been undead or not. There are spells that say they don't work on undead, but a corpse is not "undead" - it's "dead".

You say a creature doesn't change it's type when it dies, but I've seen plenty of people here on this rules forum talk about how corpses are objects, not creatures. (Breath of life targets crearures, so you could take that as proof that corpses are still creatures, or you could read it as a specific rule added to this spell that slightly enhances the window of casting. So that line of reasoning isn't definitive.)

So the question is: Does anyone have a good rules citation stating that someone who's been turned to undead and subsequently destroyed doesn't count as a "corpse" (or body/etc)? A dev post, an example from an AP, or anything similar is a good source really.

Without that the spell actually calls them "receny slain creatures", which isn't super helpful, but fits what the OP was trying to do.


Raise Dead specifically says:
"A creature who has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can’t be raised by this spell."

Breath of Life does not say that.

Therefore it works.

At least, it does if you're a cool GM who sees the players do something almost impossible (have an ally turn undead, kill that undead, and cast Breath of Life on them all in the same round) and wants the players to be happy.


Mr. Charisma wrote:

You missed the "or less than" (emphasized). I did the same until I re-read it yesterday, so apparently it doesn't even tell us that much =P

So here's why I'm not following you:

I can't see anything in the rules that actually distinguishes a difference between the corpses, dependant on whether they've been undead or not. There are spells that say they don't work on undead, but a corpse is not "undead" - it's "dead".

You say a creature doesn't change it's type when it dies, but I've seen plenty of people here on this rules forum talk about how corpses are objects, not creatures. (Breath of life targets crearures, so you could take that as proof that corpses are still creatures, or you could read it as a specific rule added to this spell that slightly enhances the window of casting. So that line of reasoning isn't definitive.)

So the question is: Does anyone have a good rules citation stating that someone who's been turned to undead and subsequently destroyed doesn't count as a "corpse" (or body/etc)? A dev post, an example from an AP, or anything similar is a good source really.

Without that the spell actually calls them "receny slain creatures", which isn't super helpful, but fits what the OP was trying to do.

Oops, I thought it meant double negative on the less than, as in "less negative" instead of "less than negative Con". Dyslexia's a b*tch.

I am not saying the type of the deceased player changes to anything, but that a spell specifically mentions it can bring people who have been undead back to life, also specifically after they have been destroyed as undead, which implies you can't do so normally. And since BoL doesn't have that line, and Raise dead has a line that is explicitly "can't raise undead" (presumably after destroyed), and the line in BoL "can't raise undead" (although it says "like cures" which is odd), it can only be assumed you can't raise a creature turned into undead with them.

Actually, your contention about corpses still being creatures and changing types brings up something interesting. When you kill a human, you now have a Human Corpse, or a Corpse with Humanoid type and Human subtype. When the Human Corpse gets animated and turned into a zombie, you now have an Undead. When you destroy the undead, if there is even a corpse remaining it is now corpse with Undead type. Therefore, the re-deaded corpse is still undead, and couldn't be raised with Raise Dead or BoL.


AD, I don't agree with your assertion that corpses necessarily have types and subtypes in the same way that creatures do. It's a dead body, not a corpse with the undead type.


Matthew Downie wrote:

Raise Dead specifically says:

"A creature who has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can’t be raised by this spell."

Breath of Life does not say that.

Therefore it works.

That's more-or-less my line of reasoning as well.

AwesomenessDog wrote:
Oops, I thought it meant double negative on the less than, as in "less negative" instead of "less than negative Con". Dyslexia's a b*tch.

It's alright I DON'T have dyslexia and I still read ot wrong for like 8 years =P (right up until this week in fact).

AwesomenessDog wrote:
I am not saying the type of the deceased player changes to anything, but that a spell specifically mentions it can bring people who have been undead back to life, also specifically after they have been destroyed as undead, which implies you can't do so normally. And since BoL doesn't have that line, and Raise dead has a line that is explicitly "can't raise undead" (presumably after destroyed), and the line in BoL "can't raise undead" (although it says "like cures" which is odd), it can only be assumed you can't raise a creature turned into undead with them.

Ok I can follow that reasoning. This is more about whether you need special permission to rase an un-un-dead or you need special restrictions blocking you from raising un-un-dead.

RAISE DEAD and REINCARNATE have text denying this option.

RESURRECTION and TRUE RESURRECTION have text allowing it.

TEMPORARY RESURRECTION and BREATH OF LIFE don't specifically say either way.

It is worth nothing that the text from Raise Dead (and Reincarnate) is this (where the text is differet Italics is Raise dead and Ooc is Reincarnate):

Quote:
A creature who (that) has been turned into an undead creature or killed by a death effect can't be raised (returned to life) by this spell.

While the text for Breath of Life is this:

Quote:
Creatures slain by death effects cannot be saved by breath of life.

And you can see that the bolded section is specifically missong from Breath of Life.

The last paragraph could be read to say that Breath of Life can't return undead, but I read that as talking about attacking a still-moving undead creature with Breath of life (so destroying a zombie with Breath of Life won't resurrect the creature).

Quote:
Like cure spells, breath of life deals damage to undead creatures rather than curing them, and cannot bring them back to life.

And finally ...

avr wrote:
AD, I don't agree with your assertion that corpses necessarily have types and subtypes in the same way that creatures do. It's a dead body, not a corpse with the undead type.

I full atree with avr here. I think there's a big leap to say a corpse has a type. There's even text in Temporary resurrection that talks about corpses being their own thing, so I think this is a rabbit hole not worth going down.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If corpses didnt have a type outsiders could be raised. They can't, because of type. So it's not just a corpse. Its undead.

Undead cant be brought back to life by this spell seems pretty clear once that's defined.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Breath of Life can bring back Outsiders.


That isn't here nor there. That point was simply that it tells us a corpse remains its subtype.

The spell specifically says it cant bring undead back to life. The corpse is a destroyed undead. It remains so.

So it doesnt work.


Cavall wrote:

If corpses didnt have a type outsiders could be raised. They can't, because of type. So it's not just a corpse. Its undead.

Undead cant be brought back to life by this spell seems pretty clear once that's defined.

Right. I'm getting where you're coming from now.

If A, then B.

If Type = Undead, then Cannot Resurrect.

If Cannot Resurrect due to type, then Corpse retains subtype.

Seems logical, but ...

Quote:
You cannot resurrect someone who has died of old age.

This would mean age is a type.

The restrictions of who can and cannot be resurrected don't fall along fhe lines of Creature Type. You can't infer that a corpse retains type from these spells alone.

I'm willing to go with the premise that corpses retain creature type if you can show that they do, but these spells don't do it.


Age doesn't need to be a creature type for a death from old age to be irretrievable. It's just a specific restriction.


MrCharisma wrote:
Cavall wrote:

If corpses didnt have a type outsiders could be raised. They can't, because of type. So it's not just a corpse. Its undead.

Undead cant be brought back to life by this spell seems pretty clear once that's defined.

Right. I'm getting where you're coming from now.

If A, then B.

If Type = Undead, then Cannot Resurrect.

If Cannot Resurrect due to type, then Corpse retains subtype.

Seems logical, but ...

Quote:
You cannot resurrect someone who has died of old age.

This would mean age is a type.

The restrictions of who can and cannot be resurrected don't fall along fhe lines of Creature Type. You can't infer that a corpse retains type from these spells alone.

I'm willing to go with the premise that corpses retain creature type if you can show that they do, but these spells don't do it.

Goes back to that original quote you gave, and I bolded. Let me repeat the part I bolded.

Quote:


he can ask questions of a destroyed undead or a neutralized or destroyed haunt. To use this ability on a corporeal undead, the haunt collector must have the creature’s head in his possession. 

So we know it's a destroyed undead. A body. And must have the head of it. Which is still called corporeal undead.

Even though its destroyed it's still being called corporeal undead, not some untyped corpse.

I mean, you're asking for the absence of evidence and that's kind of hard to do. It would be better to ask if, while finding your subtype is changed upon death to undead, if theres an instance where it says it changes back upon the undead being destroyed. Of which I could find none. Since we can find evidence of the subtype being changed in the first place, logically there should be evidence of the second instance. Since there is not, it does not. The above quote merely supports that by continuing to call the destroyed body "undead".

And the spell doesnt work on undead.


Cavall wrote:
If corpses didnt have a type outsiders could be raised. They can't, because of type. So it's not just a corpse. Its undead.

Does not follow. It is not necessary for a corpse to be an outsider, because the living creature it would return to is an outsider. Since that is impossible, the resurrection fails.

Conversely, the former humanoid who was briefly a zombie does have a legal type they can return to. Since there is no restriction in the spell against targets who have been undead (unlike say rase dead), and it is not currently undead, the spell works mostly fine. THe only slight wrinkle is accurately determining its current hp total, since it presumably took more abuse as a zombie.

Unless you have some evidence for your assertion that former creatures have creature types?

_
glass.


MrCharisma wrote:
Cavall wrote:

If corpses didnt have a type outsiders could be raised. They can't, because of type. So it's not just a corpse. Its undead.

Undead cant be brought back to life by this spell seems pretty clear once that's defined.

Right. I'm getting where you're coming from now.

If A, then B.

If Type = Undead, then Cannot Resurrect.

If Cannot Resurrect due to type, then Corpse retains subtype.

Seems logical, but ...

Quote:
You cannot resurrect someone who has died of old age.

This would mean age is a type.

The restrictions of who can and cannot be resurrected don't fall along fhe lines of Creature Type. You can't infer that a corpse retains type from these spells alone.

I'm willing to go with the premise that corpses retain creature type if you can show that they do, but these spells don't do it.

As I pointed out earlier. The spell geb's hammer can only target undead corpses. This spell suggests that corpses have creature types and it's the spell that changed my opinion if BoL would work or not. It's like no one saw my post.


glass wrote:

Unless you have some evidence for your assertion that former creatures have creature types?

_
glass.

Does an animal who had Awaken cast on them retain their type as a magical beast if they die and Breath of Life/Raise Dead/Resurrection/etc. is cast upon them? Why or why not?

If they don't change back to animal type, why does a creature who's type was changed to undead change back?

This is, of course, ignoring the evidence LordKalias has produced.


LordKailas wrote:
As I pointed out earlier. The spell geb's hammer can only target undead corpses. This spell suggests that corpses have creature types and it's the spell that changed my opinion if BoL would work or not. It's like no one saw my post.

I saw it, but I was super busy at the time and completely forgot about it, sorry =P

Let's take a look:

Source Inner Sea Magic pg. 55

School: necromancy
Level: arcanist 4, sorcerer 4, witch 4, wizard 4

CASTING

Casting Time: 1 standard action
Components: V, S, M (a leather glove coated in dried embalming herbs)

EFFECT

Range: close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect: sphere of undead remains composed of 3 or more destroyed undead
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw none
Spell Resistance: yes

DESCRIPTION

Centuries of war with Nex trained the necromancers of Geb to extract every last resource from the mindless undead that make up most of Geb’s rank-and-file troops.

When you cast this spell, you draw the remains of nearby destroyed undead together and fuse them into a mass of flesh and bone you can then hurl at any foes within range. Three corpses within range of the spell are required for the spell to function. Geb’s hammer can be directed to attack one foe within range per round as a move action. It uses your caster level as its base attack bonus, modified by your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma modifier (whichever one is highest). On a hit, the corpse hammer deals 1d6 points of damage per three caster levels (to a maximum of 6d6 points of damage).

Geb’s hammer also has secondary effects based on the nature of the three bodies you use to create it. If the majority used to create Geb’s hammer (at least two) were skeletal, the jagged bits of bone cause the corpse hammer to deal slashing damage and increase Geb’s hammer’s critical threat range to 19–20. On the other hand, if the majority were fleshy (at least two), the increased mass causes Geb’s hammer to deal bludgeoning damage and increase its critical hit damage to ×3.

Undead that have been destroyed by positive energy or a similar effect that does not leave a corpse, like a disintegrate spell, cannot be used to form Geb’s hammer.

I bolded all the sections that refer to the remains that are used.

The main thing I got from this spell was that undead destroyed by Positive Energy don't leave remains (the last paragraph), which surprised me.


Me too. I mean, makes some sense. The positive energy eating away the body to dust. But I didnt know it did it.


Anyways. Undead remains. That's enough to say they remain undead (sorry) for me.


It is kind of important that undead have remains, not corpses. Spells that raise undead target corpses, not remains. Undead do not leave corpses because the devs don't want a cycle of animating the same undead once it has been destroyed.


willuwontu wrote:
glass wrote:
Unless you have some evidence for your assertion that former creatures have creature types?
Does an animal who had Awaken cast on them retain their type as a magical beast if they die and Breath of Life/Raise Dead/Resurrection/etc. is cast upon them? Why or why not?

That is a good question.

willuwontu wrote:
This is, of course, ignoring the evidence LordKalias has produced.

I did not ignore anything, although I missed the reference to Geb's hammer that was expanded on in a later post. Now that I have seen it, I am still not sure it is persuasive; "undead remains" could easily be describing the remains of something that was formerly undead, rather than the remains of something that is currently undead.

(I could refer to a plate with a few crumbs on it and some dirty cutlery as the "remains of my breakfast"; that would not in any way mean it was still my breakfast.)

Your question regarding Awaken is better. I will have to think on that some more.

_
glass.


You could refer to crumbs as anything. But I've yet to see anything that says they lose the undead subtype upon death. That's all that needs to be stated.

Otherwise, again, this is just a non conversation. All the proof is being displayed on one side and nothing counters it.

Unless you have something that says undead lose their type upon death and then can be raised... it doesnt work.


Cavall wrote:
You could refer to crumbs as anything. But I've yet to see anything that says they lose the undead subtype upon death. That's all that needs to be stated.

I'm not seeing anything that says a corpse HAS a type. I think this is the fundamental problem we're having.

Even Geb's Hammer refers to it as "Undead remains", "Destroyed undead", "Corpses" and "Bodies", meaning the terminology really isn't consistent. For me I'm seeing those words as descriptions rather than classifications, which means they don't offer much to help a ruling.

Quote:
Otherwise, again, this is just a non conversation.

I think it's two non-conversations where we're not really understanding what the other is seeing and butting heads without making much progress.

I'm happy to agree to disagree here, it's a pretty niche case. In most games I assume the GM will make a snap ruling, then look it up for later, then never have it come up in their entire gaming career again. Having a ruling on this doesn't matter so much if it'll never be used =P


I agree it's a pretty niche case. It will likely rarely ever come up, this may be a singular case.


Another thing to consider is that Breath of Life's target is a "creature touched", unlike Gentle Repose's "corpse touched".

Since creatures have types (and sometimes subtypes), and there is nothing in the dead condition to state that you lose your type, a dead creature would retain its types for the purposes of spells that target it as a creature.

RE: Breakfast

It's not really so much the remains of your breakfast as it is saying that it's bacon bits. It's just small crumbs of bacon, but it is still bacon for all intents and purposes.

Now, passing someone small bits of bacon when they ask for bacon is a good way to start a fight, but then again, so is giving someone a corpse when they say they could use an extra body over there.


Cavall wrote:
Unless you have something that says undead lose their type upon death and then can be raised... it doesnt work.

You have it backwards. The burden of proof is on those saying that a non-creature has a creature type.

Nobody needs to prove that a corpse does not have a creature type, and more than they need to prove that a long sword does not have a creature type.

_
glass.

Shadow Lodge

glass wrote:
Cavall wrote:
Unless you have something that says undead lose their type upon death and then can be raised... it doesnt work.

You have it backwards. The burden of proof is on those saying that a non-creature has a creature type.

Nobody needs to prove that a corpse does not have a creature type, and more than they need to prove that a long sword does not have a creature type.

_
glass.

By your logic, breath of life can't actually be used to bring anything back to life ever. If a body is just an object, then it is an invalid target for the breath of life spell, which specifically states:

"Target creature touched"

So it only works on creatures, and creatures do have types.

Furthermore, if this body you cast bol on was just an object, it wouldn't have a constitution score, same with undead. So it is impossible to heal it to "a negative amount less than its Constitution score." You have to consider the body to be a still living creature for this spell to actually function as intended.

1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Breath of Life Within 1 Round After Dying Twice (Complicated) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.