Cyclic Reincarnation clarification

[FaezerBeam]

Question: A dragon we will call Frank is killed 1000 years ago. Frank was raised as an Undead Dragon 10 years ago. Undead frank is then killed today. Would Cyclic Reincarnation work to restore Frank to a new live body? The spell says it works up to one year after the target dies, but is that from when Frank original died or 1 year from when the Undead version of Frank died (today)?

The wording of the spell is unclear with a RAW answer, but with the other stipulations of tye spell that set it apart from the standard reincarnation spell, it would SEEM that the cyclic version is intended to work in this case by RAI. Official ruling references would be appreciated, especially if anyone has seen any errata for this. Thanks folx.

[OmniMage]

I don't think so. The whole dead for 1000 years disqualifies Frank from cyclic reincarnation. Undead Frank is not Frank. Killing undead Frank doesn't count as a recent death for Frank. Or at least that is what I'd rule.

[OmniMage]

Hmm... That got me thinking. *danger* If undead Frank was an intelligent undead, then got killed, then Frank was returned to life, would he have any memories of undead Frank? Because if memories are not preserved, then intelligent undead have a very good reason to try to remain undead. There isn't an after life for them. At least, not for the undead version

Though one could argue that forgetting an undead existence is a good things. The change to undead can change people in ways that make them harm friends and family. For instance, being changed to a vampire or ghoul. A revived person probably doesn't want such memories.

[zza ni]

OmniMage wrote:

Hmm... That got me thinking. *danger* If undead Frank was an intelligent undead, then got killed, then Frank was returned to life, would he have any memories of undead Frank? Because if memories are not preserved, then intelligent undead have a very good reason to try to remain undead. There isn't an after life for them. At least, not for the undead version

Though one could argue that forgetting an undead existence is a good things. The change to undead can change people in ways that make them harm friends and family. For instance, being changed to a vampire or ghoul. A revived person probably doesn't want such memories.

i think (not sure though) that most intelligent undead keep their skills and such (relaying on skeleton champion for this fact). if so i think they keep their memory from their living time. i think it will only be right that after they get back to the living group of the world they get to keep what ever memories they got while being undead (as long as it was intelligent of course). again, just my take on this. no proof.

[Coidzor]

FaezerBeam wrote:

Question: A dragon we will call Frank is killed 1000 years ago. Frank was raised as an Undead Dragon 10 years ago. Undead frank is then killed today. Would Cyclic Reincarnation work to restore Frank to a new live body? The spell says it works up to one year after the target dies, but is that from when Frank original died or 1 year from when the Undead version of Frank died (today)?

The wording of the spell is unclear with a RAW answer, but with the other stipulations of tye spell that set it apart from the standard reincarnation spell, it would SEEM that the cyclic version is intended to work in this case by RAI. Official ruling references would be appreciated, especially if anyone has seen any errata for this. Thanks folx.

Cyclic Reincarnation would not work on Frank, because he died too long ago.

Now if Frank had been under a Gentle Repose effect for those 990 years where he was just a corpse and then that Gentle Repose effect was maintained on Nega Frank, then you would have a real question on your hands.

Also, living creatures die, unliving creatures such as undead and constructs do not die, they are destroyed instead. It's a bit of a subtle distinction, but it's an important one at times.

OmniMage wrote:

Hmm... That got me thinking. *danger* If undead Frank was an intelligent undead, then got killed, then Frank was returned to life, would he have any memories of undead Frank? Because if memories are not preserved, then intelligent undead have a very good reason to try to remain undead. There isn't an after life for them. At least, not for the undead version

Though one could argue that forgetting an undead existence is a good things. The change to undead can change people in ways that make them harm friends and family. For instance, being changed to a vampire or ghoul. A revived person probably doesn't want such memories.

I think it depends on the type of undead.

A Lich or a vampire, yeah, probably. A vampire spawn or ordinary ghoul, probably not. Vampire spawn or Ghoul as a template? Now you're getting to the real tricky stuff.

[Diego Rossi]

I don't see why being dead for 1000 years and then "alive" (even if undead) for 10 disqualifies it.
If a person was resurrected after 1 year and a day, it would be an invalid target for this spell in the future? I don't think so.

The problem is if being undead counts as being "not dead" for the spell. As it works on creatures that were tuned into undead, I would say that being an undead count ad being "non dead" during that period for the targets of the spell.

Undead traits wrote:

Not affected by raise dead and reincarnate spells or abilities. Resurrection and true resurrection can affect undead creatures. These spells turn undead creatures back into the living creatures they were before becoming undead.

While it has never been formalized in Pathfinder (AFAIK), in earlier editions the time the creature "lived" as an undead wasn't a limit to the ability to resurrect them.

Personally, I would require Frank to have been an intelligent undead, not a mindless almost construct as a skeleton, nor part of some composite undead made by pieces of different creatures. From my point of view, the spell would work if the animating energy of the undead did contain a piece of the soul of the creature.

[Pizza Lord]

It would not work. The spell does not work on a creature that died more than 1 year before. This means you check for the last time the creature died and was alive. Being undead is not being alive. A spell that affects living creatures will not affect an undead creature, no matter how recently or distantly they've died.

If your great-grandmother died 75 years ago and came back as a ghost two weeks ago when her remains were disturbed by tomb robbers, she may have 'come back' but that doesn't mean she 'came back to life'. She's still been dead for 75 years. If you destroy her ghost or spirit or banish her soul to the beyond, you can't just cast reincarnate on her bones in the family crypt. Even if she was a ghost from the time of her death and she's been puttering around the family mansion for 75 years. She's been dead for 75 years. As stated, undead don't 'die' they are 'destroyed'.

I don't see anything that says undead creatures that are returned to life lose any experiences from their existence. Obviously like others I would only include non-mindless undead (since those aren't typically the souls of the departed, just animating elemental force) and some level of actual personality being there. A spirit that is just the echoes of an emotion, like rage or despair, and not necessarily the actual persona (twisted though it might be or tainted by evil) probably isn't remembered. And certain things will likely be colored or hazy since an undead mind might have thoughts and emotions and impulses that aren't necessarily easy to adapt to how a living creature's brain works. For instance, he might not have thought about the person he ate as a ghoul any more than you might have thought about the chicken you ate, so he sees no point in pondering it unless he or someone else forces him to think about it. So many memories will likely be there, but stored in a different manner than how you or I (presumably living creatures capable of sympathetic understanding) might remember the same act if we committed it.