Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FarSouth 01-01-08, 07:36 PM	I have a question regarding the raise dead spell, which arose during a session I DMed a few days ago. On p 268 of the PH the spell description states: While the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds, the body of the creature to be raised must be whole. Otherwise missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life. Our group had two alternative interpretations of this in relation to a situation where the subject creature has had several limbs chopped off, specifically with regard to the meaning of "whole" and "missing parts". One view was that as long as the severed limbs were present (ie next to the main torso) when the spell was cast, the spell would cause the limbs to re-attach. This interpretation assumed that "whole" simply meant that all the body parts were present and none had been eaten, lost or had otherwise gone "missing". The alternative view was that while the spell would close wounds and repair lethal damage, it would not reattach severed parts. So if a creature had lost limbs, it would not be considered "whole" and therefore would be missing those limbs when raised, regardless of whether the original body parts had been preserved. P 41 of the DMG doesn't really help, as it just notes that the raise dead spell "doesn't regenerate missing body parts". We all agree that reattaching body parts (as per the first interpretation above) is distinctly different from regeneration, as no new parts are being grown. While I initially leaned towards the second view, I now think the first interpretation makes more sense. Any thoughts from the rest of you, or any "official" rules clarification you can point me towards? Incidentally, the question arose when two members (a kobold sorcerer and a half-orc barbarian) of the 4-person party were killed in battle. The surviving cleric is unable to cast raise dead yet (one level too low) but the kobold had previously purchased a raise dead scroll, which he left instructions to use on him if he was killed. The two survivors wanted to use the scroll on one of their comrades and then make the week long trek back to civilisation with the body of the other and pay for a second raise dead spell. But the dead kobold weighed about 50 lbs while the slain half-orc weighed approximately 320 lbs. Raising the half-orc made the most practical sense, as the 50 lb kobold corpse could be easily transported - but that would be going against the instructions of the kobold who actually paid for the scroll. Raising the kobold would result in the near-impossible task of transporting the 320 lb corpse of the half-orc - unless she was chopped into several pieces that could be put into Heward's Handy Haversack. That's where the question about severed body parts came in...
kuonji 01-02-08, 02:06 AM	I'm of the mind that the spell would not reattach the chopped off parts. If the group is planning on raising both dead characters, then this shouldn't really be an issue, bring the barbarian back up and raise the kobold back at town. If the group isn't going to raise both, then it's the kobold's scroll, use it as he wanted and bury the barbarian.
Andrew 01-02-08, 02:09 AM	I don't think that trying to patchwork the body together will work for raise dead - it seems against the wording and intent of the spell. When trying to comprehend how raise dead works, it makes the most sense to me to look at it as fixing anything a timely cure spell could have prevented. It doesn't seem to work on anything other than death due to simply running out of hit points, though I am unsure of if/how it works against having your Con reduced to 0 through ability damage or drain. For comparison, look at the regenerate spell - it's a 7th level spell, where raise dead is 5th.
Kragg Bonemeal 01-02-08, 11:22 AM	Bah... chop up the orc. Just cast Mend on the pieces of the dead body (now considered an object) before casting Raise Dead.
mvincent 01-02-08, 12:55 PM	I'm of the mind that the spell would not reattach the chopped off parts.I believe the writer's intent to be otherwise. Every precedence I've seen has the spell reattaching hacked off bits (providing they can be found). Otherwise, someone slain via decapitation couldn't (or at least shouldn't) be raised. If the stipulation was intended for "unattached" bits (rather than "missing" bits), I believe it would have been phrased differently. But as mentioned, the mend spell would make the question moot anyway.
PenderGrass 01-02-08, 02:33 PM	I agree, the spell will likely "heal" the detached limbs back onto the body. Granted, there would likely be exceptions. :dragon: *****
Andrew 01-02-08, 07:48 PM	Otherwise, someone slain via decapitation couldn't (or at least shouldn't) be raised. That would be a coup-de-grace, a vorpal weapon, or death by massive damage. These are death effects, which raise dead explicitly cannot heal.
FarSouth 01-02-08, 08:19 PM	Thanks for the replies so far, folks. It looks like there isn't an official clarification around, or I suspect someone would have posted it by now. Bah... chop up the orc. Just cast Mend on the pieces of the dead body (now considered an object) before casting Raise Dead. If you're talking about the mending spell, I believe that can only affect one object of up to 1 lb, and according to the description will only repair "small breaks or tears in objects". So not only is it not applicable to a 300+ pound "object", but I think a severed limb would also qualify as much more than a small tear. When trying to comprehend how raise dead works, it makes the most sense to me to look at it as fixing anything a timely cure spell could have prevented. It doesn't seem to work on anything other than death due to simply running out of hit points, though I am unsure of if/how it works against having your Con reduced to 0 through ability damage or drain. It's possible to die from taking massive damage of 50 hp or more if you fail your Fort save. An 80 hp character could die this way and still have 30 hp, so it doesn't seem to me that raise dead should only work when a character runs out of hit points. There would be plenty of other ways to die that don't involve hit point loss too. The spell description also points out that, unless you're 1st level, "any ability scores damaged to 0 are raised to 1" - which can be assumed to apply to a creature which has its Con reduced to 0 too, since there is no exception stated. For those reasons I'm not so sure that the way you've described it above is necessarily the best way of approaching it. Just my opinion, though. For comparison, look at the regenerate spell - it's a 7th level spell, where raise dead is 5th. Hmm. It says "after the spell is cast, the physical regeneration is complete in 1 round if the severed members are present and touching the creature. It takes 2d10 rounds otherwise." I can see your point about it being a 7th level spell, but its usefulness is no diminished even if raise dead does reattach limbs. Raise dead can't be used on a living creature whereas regenerate can. Regenerate can also regrow limbs if the originals are not present, and incorporates a substantial healing spell too, both of which are advantages over raise dead. If the group is planning on raising both dead characters, then this shouldn't really be an issue, bring the barbarian back up and raise the kobold back at town. If the group isn't going to raise both, then it's the kobold's scroll, use it as he wanted and bury the barbarian. It's not such an issue this time, but it could potentially be relevant in some other circumstances. Although the party fully intends to ensure both characters are raised, the cleric is LG so he has some misgivings about going against the kobold's written will, even though he understands the practical reasons for raising the half-orc first.
mvincent 01-02-08, 08:33 PM	That would be a coup-de-grace, a vorpal weapon, or death by massive damage. These are death effectsNope. From the 3.0 FAQ: Is the assassin’s death attack considered a death effect for purposes of a raise dead spell? That is, can an assassination victim be raised, or must a resurrection spell be used? Only attacks with the death descriptor (see page 152 in the Player’s Handbook) interfere with the raise dead spell. The assassin’s death attack does not have the death descriptor. It’s possible for a special attack to have a descriptor that is not specifically mentioned in its description. For example, the beholder’s finger of death eye ray does have the death descriptor because it duplicates the effects of a finger of death spell, which has the death descriptor.
FarSouth 01-02-08, 08:37 PM	That would be a coup-de-grace, a vorpal weapon, or death by massive damage. These are death effects, which raise dead explicitly cannot heal. Can you give me the reference for the explicit prohibition on using raise dead on someone who has died in these ways? They're not mentioned in the spell description, which only says you can't use the spell on someone: who's been dead longer than 1 day per caster level whose soul is unwilling to return who is 1st level with 2 or less Constitution who is an outsider, elemental, construct or undead who has died of old age who has been turned undead or killed by a death effect A death effect includes things like power word kill and finger of death but not, to my knowledge, purely physical things such as coup-de-grace, beheading, or massive hit point damage. Granted, there is an implied prohibition on raising someone without a head, however if the head has been severed but is present with the rest of the corpse, I don't see this as being different from the reattachment of any other severed body part - assuming you go with mvincent and PenderGrass with their interpretation of the spell.
Andrew 01-02-08, 09:47 PM	A death effect includes things like power word kill and finger of death but not, to my knowledge, purely physical things such as coup-de-grace, beheading, or massive hit point damage. I was working from the glossary definitions of death attacks in the SRD, DMG, and PHB. The problem is that it's not perfect as to what those mean, or how to apply them. One (probably saner) take is that these apply to effects specifically called out as death attacks/effects. The other is that these rules apply to all attacks that instantly kill a target, regardless of hit points, which was what my reading was going with at the time. Further investigation and iteration makes the former more likely; death ward protects only protects against magical death effects, yet the Death Attacks description indicates that death ward protects against all death attacks, so it would seem that all death attacks for the purpose of those definitions are magical. I'm still looking around to see if this means that an assassin's Death Attack ability isn't a Death Attack.
Wih 01-03-08, 12:00 AM	Bah... chop up the orc. Just cast Mend on the pieces of the dead body (now considered an object) before casting Raise Dead. Raise Dead won't knit the body back together. Make Whole however will, which is a 2nd level cleric spell. Chop chop chop. Alternatively, cast Speak with Dead to ask the Kobold if he consents to using the scroll on the orc.
FarSouth 01-03-08, 01:02 AM	Raise Dead won't knit the body back together. Make Whole however will, which is a 2nd level cleric spell. Chop chop chop. Alternatively, cast Speak with Dead to ask the Kobold if he consents to using the scroll on the orc. Make Whole seems a much more viable option than Mending, given the larger area of effect and description of its effectiveness. I must admit that I still have a slight reservation with either spell being used on a corpse. While I recognise the logic of a corpse no longer being a living creature and therefore possibly being an "object", both spell descriptions state that they cannot be used on creatures or constructs. A dead creature is still, arguably, a creature. And a construct is also non-living - so it seems to me that the intent of both spells is that they cannot be used on any form of creature, living or otherwise. But that is clearly up for debate! As far as Speak With Dead goes, the cleric considered this but concluded it probably wouldn't work. The spell doesn't allow the caster to actually speak with the person whose soul has departed, just draw on the knowledge it had prior to death. Therefore the kobold couldn't "consent" to the scroll being used on the half-orc (a post-death action).
kuonji 01-03-08, 01:54 AM	It's not such an issue this time, but it could potentially be relevant in some other circumstances. Although the party fully intends to ensure both characters are raised, the cleric is LG so he has some misgivings about going against the kobold's written will, even though he understands the practical reasons for raising the half-orc first. LG doesn't mean unintelligent automaton that must follow every order he's given. In this case I don't think he's suddenly going to become chaotic just for using some practical logic. If anything, the party should learn to spend pooled money on raise dead magic that is available as needed and not for any one member. The spell description also points out that, unless you're 1st level, "any ability scores damaged to 0 are raised to 1" - which can be assumed to apply to a creature which has its Con reduced to 0 too, since there is no exception stated. For those reasons I'm not so sure that the way you've described it above is necessarily the best way of approaching it. Just my opinion, though. I wondered about this. The spells says damaged to 0 are raised to 1, but what about abilities that are drained to 0? Ability drain and ability damage are two separate effects. Make Whole seems a much more viable option than Mending, given the larger area of effect and description of its effectiveness. I must admit that I still have a slight reservation with either spell being used on a corpse. While I recognise the logic of a corpse no longer being a living creature and therefore possibly being an "object", both spell descriptions state that they cannot be used on creatures or constructs. A dead creature is still, arguably, a creature. And a construct is also non-living - so it seems to me that the intent of both spells is that they cannot be used on any form of creature, living or otherwise. Here's another one to contemplate: What happens when you cast Animate Objects on a corpse?
mvincent 01-03-08, 02:20 AM	What happens when you cast Animate Objects on a corpse?It becomes an animated object (that one could even mistake for undead, even though it is a construct).
FarSouth 01-03-08, 05:39 PM	LG doesn't mean unintelligent automaton that must follow every order he's given. In this case I don't think he's suddenly going to become chaotic just for using some practical logic. If anything, the party should learn to spend pooled money on raise dead magic that is available as needed and not for any one member. My brief description of the situation probably didn't do it justice. The LG cleric isn't being played like one of those stupid "we-must-have-rules-for-everything-and-I-will-not-deviate-from-them" lawful caricatures. There was no suggestion that his alignment would be affected by his decision. It was simply that, given an express written instruction via the kobold's will and based on his knowledge of the kobold's personality, he did not want to override that decision lightly, and wanted to explore whether there was some way to respect the kobold's wishes yet still achieve the best outcome for the party. Ultimately he decided that the best interests of the party as a whole were paramount and would be best served by raising the half-orc first. I commend the player for taking all those things into consideration rather than either following a blind alignment-dominated dogma or treating the deaths (and the solution) as a mere game mechanic. He role-played the way a LG cleric who respected the wishes of the dead would act, IMO. The players have realised from this encounter that their characters (who have not been together as a party for all that long) need to take a more tactical and coordinated approach. I have no doubt that once the kobold is raised they will discuss the benefits of pooling money for raise dead magic. They were just lucky this time that the kobold had the forsight and self-interest to have purchased a raise dead scroll on his own initiative. Here's another one to contemplate: What happens when you cast Animate Objects on a corpse? Heh heh heh. Yes, it's another one in the same category. The spell target descriptor is one small "object" per caster level and the text says the object can be of any nonmagical material. Again, my gut feeling is that this is not intended for dead creatures - particularly as the Animate Dead spell exists for that very purpose (though the latter turns the corpse into undead, which Animate Objects would not do). However I also found a description of animated objects in combat which mentions "a flexible animated object such as a rope, vine or rug...". So if a vine, which is part of a living organism, can be animated, then why not a corpse? Ideally the writers should have expressly ruled corpses in or out of these spells. Pity it's ambiguous.
Cifer 01-03-08, 06:39 PM	Here's another one to contemplate: What happens when you cast Animate Objects on a corpse? As others already said, it turns the corpse into an Animated Object which probably looks like an undead and will drive clerics trying to turn it a little mad ("It doesn't blip on Detect Undead"-"Yeah. Ever heard of Nondetection?"-"And I can't turn it!"-"Guess you're too weak..."-"I'm the High Priest of Pelor!")... Personally, I doubt Raise Dead can attach something as massive as a limb. My main reason is that this is what Regenerate, a level 7 spell, and ressurection, equally level 7, are for.
Andrew 01-03-08, 06:51 PM	Props to the player for the right choice. All considered, the odds of a question like this thread's seems less likely than an inevitable question about if Lawful Good has a problem with the pragmatism of benevolent ends justifying what amounts to desecrating a corpse and hauling it around like ham. At least they didn't cast continual flame, shrink item, or a permanency'd invisibility on anybody's corpse before having it raised.
mvincent 01-03-08, 06:52 PM	Personally, I doubt Raise Dead can attach something as massive as a limb. My main reason is that this is what Regenerate, a level 7 spell, and ressurection, equally level 7, are for.Note that those spells grow back (i.e. create) limbs rather than merely attach them. The idea of needing to find all the limbs of a gibbed fellow adventurer in order to raise him seems like a standard (if humorous) protocal in D&D games (especially for Nodwick comics). If raise dead didn't attach limbs (and ressurect doesn't need them) that excercise would serve no purpose. The spell says: "the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds" ... that seems to imply that things like decapitation or being hacked-up would be repaired. And in the sentence: "missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life" ... the writer appears to be refering to parts that are actually missing, rather than simply unattached.
wrecan 01-03-08, 07:50 PM	I have to agree with the person who said make whole should make the question moot. A corpse is an object, not a creature or a construct. Moreover the following line from the spell -- "the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds" -- would seem to include severed extremities (which is about as lethal as you can get!). The spell reattaches limbs, but doesn't recreate them.
Cifer 01-03-08, 08:10 PM	Note that those spells grow back (i.e. create) limbs rather than merely attach them. Regenerate also has a "reattach" mode which takes one round instead of the 2D10 it would otherwise use. The idea of needing to find all the limbs of a gibbed fellow adventurer in order to raise him seems like a standard (if humorous) protocal in D&D games (especially for Nodwick comics). If raise dead didn't attach limbs (and ressurect doesn't need them) that excercise would serve no purpose. I don't see a reason for it to serve a purpose. I have to agree with the person who said make whole should make the question moot. A corpse is an object, not a creature or a construct. I don't know. Using the spell like that sounds fishy to me. I guess my main problem with it is that I want a method for someone to keep someone else at least somewhat reliably dead without taking exotic measures. Tearing someone limb from limb has until now always been enough for that, in the same way that "we can't use Speak with Dead since the killer has ripped out the victims' tongues and lower jaws" wouldn't work anymore.
FarSouth 01-03-08, 08:10 PM	I have to agree with the person who said make whole should make the question moot. A corpse is an object, not a creature or a construct. Moreover the following line from the spell -- "the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds" -- would seem to include severed extremities (which is about as lethal as you can get!). The spell reattaches limbs, but doesn't recreate them. This pretty much sums up how I'm feeling about both matters (reattaching limbs with raise dead and the application of "object" spells to corpses) now, having considered all the arguments. I guess my main problem with it is that I want a method for someone to keep someone else at least somewhat reliably dead without taking exotic measures. Tearing someone limb from limb has until now always been enough for that, in the same way that "we can't use Speak with Dead since the killer has ripped out the victims' tongues and lower jaws" wouldn't work anymore. You can still achieve the same aim by cutting off the head and disposing of it. Although a person could be raised without certain body parts, generally the absence of a head makes life somewhat difficult.
mvincent 01-03-08, 08:30 PM	I guess my main problem with it is that I want a method for someone to keep someone else at least somewhat reliably dead without taking exotic measures. Tearing someone limb from limb has until now always been enough for thatHey, nothing wrong with house-ruling it as you desire. It's just that trying to assert that this is how the default D&D rules work doesn't pass the sniff test. D&D writers have written articles on this subject, and your method was never mentioned. They've instead recommended things like keeping the body. I like Farsouth's recommendation though of merely keeping a (vital) part of the body ;)
Wih 01-03-08, 09:06 PM	Make Whole seems a much more viable option than Mending, given the larger area of effect and description of its effectiveness. I must admit that I still have a slight reservation with either spell being used on a corpse. While I recognise the logic of a corpse no longer being a living creature and therefore possibly being an "object", both spell descriptions state that they cannot be used on creatures or constructs. A dead creature is still, arguably, a creature. And a construct is also non-living - so it seems to me that the intent of both spells is that they cannot be used on any form of creature, living or otherwise. But that is clearly up for debate! While yes, it may seem a little against RAI, it's RAW. A dead body is an object, and as such not longer counts against teleported creature limits, can be the target of spells like Hardening that effects objects etc. As far as Speak With Dead goes, the cleric considered this but concluded it probably wouldn't work. The spell doesn't allow the caster to actually speak with the person whose soul has departed, just draw on the knowledge it had prior to death. Therefore the kobold couldn't "consent" to the scroll being used on the half-orc (a post-death action). The kobold as such can't consent, but you can ask him if he would consent to it: "Both you and the huge Half-Orc are now dead; theoretically, would you consent to the use of your Raise Dead scroll to bring back the body of a far heavier friend so that we can raise you without a chance of scroll faliure once we reach town?" Perfectly viable question, and it will let you know wether or not he would object once he found it out. But by far, the easiest way to me seems to chop up the half-orc and Make Whole him at town.
FarSouth 01-04-08, 12:15 AM	The kobold as such can't consent, but you can ask him if he would consent to it: "Both you and the huge Half-Orc are now dead; theoretically, would you consent to the use of your Raise Dead scroll to bring back the body of a far heavier friend so that we can raise you without a chance of scroll faliure once we reach town?" Perfectly viable question, and it will let you know wether or not he would object once he found it out. Although this is heading a bit off topic, I personally don't think this question would be viable. It essentially requires the dead corpse to make a decision - does it "consent" to the proposed course of action or not - and the spell description makes it clear that it can't do that. It's not the person, it just has the body's stored memories prior to death. The spell reads: 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. I think you could ask it whether it had ever considered such an eventuality (ie its death, and the use of the scroll on someone else) before death, and if so, what conclusion it had reached before death. But if the character had never contemplated such a situation and arrived at a particular view before he was slain, the spell doesn't provide him with an opportunity to do so after death. That would require communication/explanation of the post-death situation, and the corpse can't learn new information - something it would need to do in order to provide "consent".
wrecan 01-04-08, 09:12 AM	I guess my main problem with it is that I want a method for someone to keep someone else at least somewhat reliably dead without taking exotic measures. FarSouth's idea (destroy the head) was a good one. If you want the body to be recognizable, keep the heart instead. Most creatures have trouble surviving without a heart. I think it would be reasonable to rule that Make Whole does not replace missing parts, just like Raise Dead does not. So if you have the limbs, make whole will reattach them. If you don't, Make Whole will simply close the wound. So if you remove someone's tongue, Make Whole won't restore it and speak with dead still won't function.
Subversive 01-05-08, 09:57 AM	This topic raises interesting possibilities. The party loses a member to an attack. Later, they return to recover the body. They successfully raise dead, bringing him back to life. There's just one problem. Over time, the character begins suffering from an unexplainable malady. His skin begins to yellow. He becomes tired and sluggish. He cannot eat. If untreated, he dies once more. What happened? The party's enemies cut out his liver.
1 ton ghost 01-05-08, 02:34 PM	though grizzly, we would often play headhunters not only for the big F-U this provides to anyone acquiring the body post mortem, but typically, it is for the circumnavigation of Speak w/ Dead. ie)there is no witness to said demise. i am a bit cynical though about employing Make Whole on a cadavre in attempts to screw Raise Dead. this is what Ressurection and True Ressurection are for, you know? simply assuming that the head (arm, liver, left buttcheek) are missing and that this spell will magically replace it seems a bit daft. ie)a cheat or loophole more or less. RAW might imply, "dead body = object", but metaphorically, it feels off. that is, the playdough fun factory of life has limits too.
Voran 01-07-08, 07:36 PM	As one would guess, this makes it useful to chop the heads off your foes once they're dead, since it requires much more effort to have them revived now than if you had just stabbed them through the heart to kill them. It all depends on how hard you want to play raising dead in your game. On one hand, unless the person died in pristine condition, raise dead would never work.
mvincent 01-07-08, 07:52 PM	simply assuming that the head (arm, liver, left buttcheek) are missing and that this spell will magically replace it seems a bit daft.I don't think anyone has suggested that. The debate is over whether the spell will reattach severed (but not missing) bits. Given that the spell could say, sew up a limb that was almost severed in multiple locations, it doesn't seem unreasonable for it to sew up a limb that was completely severed in a single location (assuming the limb was placed correctly).