Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dakkareth 10-11-04, 07:09 PM	Can a skeleton speak? Or more specifically, can it cast spells with vocal components, assuming it has levels in a spell-casting class? My necromancer has developped a spell to possess undead under his control (similar to magic jar) and hopes, he doesn't have to use silenced spells while doing so ...
Dark1ord 10-11-04, 07:23 PM	I would say the lack of vocal chords kinda take that option away from them. besides, they're supposed to be mindless (no brain there). maybe they can clack their teeth.
Seeker95 10-11-04, 07:44 PM	Not in my campaign. At least not without one of a few different spells.
CzarGarrett 10-11-04, 07:48 PM	I concur. Speech comes from the vocal chords (not-skeletal) and tongue (non-skeletal). A skeleton, by defintion, has neither.
Bacon and Eggs 10-11-04, 08:51 PM	It doesn't have muscle tissue either but it can still walk. Meh.
ORC_Paradox 10-11-04, 09:08 PM	Good point! They also don't have eyes yet can still "see". While some gameplay is geared towards "realism", we can't ignore the fact that it's a fantasy (i.e. Fictional) world where magic works.
Dark1ord 10-11-04, 09:19 PM	hmm, yeah, I would think "animation" in this way was moving stuff around by magic... perhaps the undead have a "sense" of their surroundings... but allowing them to speak? probably only suitable to greater undead... zombies could moan and groan, though (I certainly think that belongs to a zombie hehe).
Fixxxer 10-11-04, 09:25 PM	So the reason a skeleton can't speak is because it has no vocal cords? Alright, then explain how the skeletal corpse of a lich is able to cast spells? In my game, I assume a skeleton can't speak because it doesn't have the intelligence or the need. Of course, this is assuming we're talking about a basic skeleton and not someone with the skeletal creature template.
Kojiro James 10-11-04, 09:55 PM	No intelligence means no brain means no speech.
Edymnion 10-11-04, 10:41 PM	So the reason a skeleton can't speak is because it has no vocal cords? Alright, then explain how the skeletal corpse of a lich is able to cast spells?Because the skeletal lich has had hundreds, if not thousands of years of magical experience. I'm sure that in all that time, he's found some way to do something as simple as talk. Although, if he hasn't, then no, I'd say he would be incapable of talking without magical aid. Thats the price you pay for not keeping your body in better upkeep. Heh, anybody else reminded of the last scene in Death Becomes Her?
The Vagrant 10-11-04, 11:21 PM	I would say that a skeleton can communicate through magically sending messages while uselessly clanking it's boney jaw, but only to it's creator. That is to say, it's creator or what ever sole entity was directly responsable for it's creation (the one who used the scroll, the one who awoke it, etc.).
Fixxxer 10-12-04, 12:52 AM	Because the skeletal lich has had hundreds, if not thousands of years of magical experience. I'm sure that in all that time, he's found some way to do something as simple as talk. So a wizard who becomes a lich and then gets his throat (including his vocal cords) splashed with acid a few days later is just S.O.L. because he hasn't had hundreds or thousands of years to learn how to magically speak?
JabberWocky 10-12-04, 01:11 AM	If you've ever played WarCraft III, their liches speak with an almost telepathic, resonating voice that echoes out of where their throats used to be. Their mouths and eyes glow when they intone. I think that's kickass enough to make my liches talk like that. Of course, it has the same limitations as regular speech, but... And a skeletal creature can speak, but not a skeleton, because it's a fantasy game, people.
Incenjucar 10-12-04, 01:16 AM	... Does anyone else think a template called "Silent One" for various undead would be -really- cool? Bonus to Move Silently, free "Silent Spell", and a defense against sonic attacks in exchange for being incapable of speech. Especially cool if it didn't cause a problem with undead bards, but instead created a silent vibration that only effected skeletal creatures that can 'resonate' with it. Just imagine a horde of undead barely audible as they rush towards you, shadowy sounds of bone clacking against stone floors sounding like they're a mile away when they're a dozen yards off. The silent lich points and simply opens his jaw, as he begins casting a powerful something or other, and a rumble presses in to you as you -feel- the silent song of the boney bard... And then the wizard's darkness envelopes you. --- Also, a 'sensory deprived' template could also be quite interesting. Imagine giving up all of your normal senses as an undead, getting only an extensive blindsight in return: functionally beneficial, but the flavor is that color, touch, sight, and hearing have, like your withered sense of taste, left you, in exchange for power.
xmcknight 10-12-04, 02:38 AM	My reasoning, is this. If it has an intellegence over 3. Then yes it can speak. Using the logic of it doesn't have something so it can't do it, is kinda flawed when we are talking about a magical creature. I don't care what you say. It is magical. When magic is envolved, then everything else flys out the window. BTW, a skeleton does not have muscles. How does it move? Answer: magic!
Mister Mayhem 10-12-04, 02:55 AM	I too find it highly amusing that people can dismiss the idea so easily on the grounds it has no vocal cords. Presumably the skeletons in their campaign are little threat to anyone, since without muscles, how do they move? If magic can move bones, a small amount of air should be no problem.
shift244 10-12-04, 03:05 AM	Can a skeleton speak? Or more specifically, can it cast spells with vocal components, assuming it has levels in a spell-casting class? My necromancer has developped a spell to possess undead under his control (similar to magic jar) and hopes, he doesn't have to use silenced spells while doing so ... it would depend on the DM really. if said necromancer is some BBEG or NPC that would pose a sufficient problem to the PCs then it might be agreeable to have the ability to cast spells through the possessed skeleton body/form. this would give the necromancer a great edge at survival, since s/he could well be hiding somewhere else. this is directly from one game some time ago. if said necromancer is a PC, i would think not. unless a feat, or another spell was cast on the skeleton prior to "taking over". this would reduce the power of taking over a skeletal form to gain more combat abilities while still maintaining spellcasting effectiveness. this would also fall in line with the BBEG/NPC reasoning by giving that character said feat/spell. edit: as for those who posed the no vocal argument, better to point out that the lack of lips would possibly foil the complex incantations required in the vocal component than to argue against animating the skeleton with magic. plus, skeletal clerics and mages are nothing particularly new that none here have not heard about.. which, as it comes to mind, an alternative would be to allow spell casting IF (and only if) the necromancer in question "possesses" a skeletal mage (arcane magic). possessing warrior/preist type (divine magic) skellies will render spellcasting not possible
Seeker95 10-12-04, 08:11 AM	I don't care what you say.Once I got to this line, I stopped reading.
xmcknight 10-12-04, 08:58 AM	Once I got to this line, I stopped reading. Sorry about that line. It is ment for the people who say skeletons arn't magical, they're undead. I had this arguement with a friend not to long ago. So yes there are people who say that. I do actually care what everyone says. It lets me know the intellegence of people I am dealing with.
Fixxxer 10-12-04, 09:20 AM	Sorry about that line. It is ment for the people who say skeletons arn't magical, they're undead. I had this arguement with a friend not to long ago. So yes there are people who say that. Just to nit-pick, you do realize that as far as the mechanics of the game are concerned, skeletons are undead and are not magical, right? I mean, you can destroy them with a turn undead attempt, but you can't dispel them with Dispel Magic. I'm not trying to goad you into an argument or anything, I'm just curious about what your logic behind this thought is.
Cravensson 10-12-04, 10:11 AM	Creatures with the Bone Creature template from Book of Vile Darkness (Hope I don't get in trouble for mentioning a Mature supplement here) can speak just fine. As can Liches, Death Knights, etc. I would say skeletons created through Animate Dead probably can't speak because A) They are no longer smart enough to do so, or B) They don't have anything real intelligent to say beyond "Yes, master". If a necromancer has a spell that lets him possess his Undead creations, though, it probably allows him to do his "Woogey Boogey" through them as well. Just my thoughts.
Mister Mayhem 10-12-04, 01:12 PM	Just to nit-pick, you do realize that as far as the mechanics of the game are concerned, skeletons are undead and are not magical, right? Then replace all references to "magic" with "phenomenom outside of the physical universe as we understand it". Its just that "magic" is a lot easier to type, even if it does give you the chance to play games with semantics.
Purkake 10-12-04, 01:52 PM	I think it was even said somewhere that eaven though they have no eyes they can see and even though they have no ears they can hear. Following this logic they should also be able to speak. Also all the intelligent undead can speak with or without vocal cords, if they couldn't how could a demilich howl ;) ? Now the mindlessness is another thing they CAN speak but normal mindless skeletons CAN'T cast spells.
Stuntman 10-12-04, 02:24 PM	Skeletons do not speak in my campaign normally. In one of the D&D novels by T.H. Lain, an undead skeleton was instructed to bang his sword on his shield if it detected an intruder. It would appear that it could not yell, so it banged his sword on his shield instead to alert others.
Sulaco 10-12-04, 02:56 PM	So the reason a skeleton can't speak is because it has no vocal cords? Alright, then explain how the skeletal corpse of a lich is able to cast spells? In my game, I assume a skeleton can't speak because it doesn't have the intelligence or the need. Of course, this is assuming we're talking about a basic skeleton and not someone with the skeletal creature template. Cos it's a lich and not a skeleton.
Sulaco 10-12-04, 03:04 PM	I think it was even said somewhere that eaven though they have no eyes they can see and even though they have no ears they can hear. Following this logic they should also be able to speak. That isn't logical and it doesn't follow. Blindsight is an ability in the game that allows creatures to perceive their surroundings visually through non-visaul means. This sets a precedent. There is to the best of my knowledge no ability in D&D that allows one to speak without a tongue, soft-palate, vocal chords, and lips. Look, it's relaly pretty simple. There is no reason to assume that skeletons can talk in D&D and no examples of other abilties or creatures to prove that it is "logical" that they should posess this ability. If you want skeletons to be able to talk then by all means make it so in your game but don't bother trying to justify it. Now, as to the question of whether or not a mage could possess a skeleton and use it to cast spells (as was the initial question), it all depends on teh level of the possessions. Simply grabbing hold of it and manipulating it by magic would be insufficient but remotely transfering your mind into the skeleton, truly possessing it rather than simply controlling it, would suffice (all IMO of course).
Purkake 10-12-04, 03:31 PM	But skeletons don't have blindsight and without hearin it wouldn't be able to follow it's masters command. Why would a skeleton be so much different form a mummy or a ghoul or a lich who can speak without proper vocal cords. What makes it so special?
Seeker95 10-12-04, 03:31 PM	would suffice (all IMO of course).I've only disagreed with Sulaco's opinion on three occasions, and none of them had to do with applide game mechanics. Go with his opinion on this one and your game will be all the better for it. :D
qstor 10-12-04, 04:01 PM	There's also a bone template IIRC in the Book of Vile Darkness that might work for a taking spell casting non lich wizard. Mike
Sulaco 10-12-04, 04:21 PM	Why would a skeleton be so much different form a mummy or a ghoul or a lich who can speak without proper vocal cords. What makes it so special? It isn't special. Far from it in fact and that is the whole point. A skeleton is the stripped-down basic model, the starter-kit, the family-sized dumb-f:censored: of the undead hierarchy. Asking why a skeleton can't talk is like asking why a Roomba (http://www.irobot.com/consumer/) can't do differential equations and build you a Chrysler.
Purkake 10-12-04, 04:30 PM	Shouldn't the basic model come with the basic speak-set with simple commands like: Yes, master; It's a beautiful morning for raising dead, master; they're here, master and so on...
Mister Mayhem 10-12-04, 04:30 PM	There is no reason to assume that skeletons can talk in D&D and no examples of other abilties or creatures to prove that it is "logical" that they should posess this ability. But on the other hand, there is no reason to assume that they cannot. Of course, they haven't the independence of thought to do so, unless instructed. But if a Necromancer wants his monstrous skeletons to whisper sinister, sibilant threats as they advance on the hapless PCs through the pitch black tomb, there is nothing to say that they have to be anything other than ordinary skeletons to be able to do it. It doesn't need "justification". *** Interestingly, the instructions for applying a skeleton template make no mention of stripping the creature of any language skills it might posess ;) The lack of Int might be considered by some to be a concluder, but there is a distinct difference between having a low Int like an animal, and having no Int Ability at all. *** Of course, the only person who can answer this particular question is the original posters DM. It's a custom spell, after all, and its exact results must be down to he that approves it for use in his game.
Callista 10-12-04, 04:33 PM	Hellooo, people... does "mindless undead" mean anything to you? Having an intelligence score is kind of a prerequisite for language. A creature without an Intelligence score is an automaton... it only does as it's been programmed. That includes speech. Skeletons can talk... you've just gotta cast Magic Mouth on 'em first. Or you could research a spell that allows you to have the skeleton say more complex things, kind of like an artificial intelligence program. :)
Sulaco 10-12-04, 04:35 PM	It doesn't need "justification". Precisely. If you want it that way than do it but trying to suggest that it is "logical" or "sensible" that it be so is a load of utter nonsense.
Mister Mayhem 10-12-04, 04:39 PM	Ahh, but what I object to is the implication inherent in your post - perhaps imagined, perhaps not - that speaking skeletons, not being "logical" or "sensible" are therefore illogical and nonsensical. Which woulf therefore reflect poorly on any DM who chose to use them. When of course, the idea of a an empty skull being able to talk is no more illogical or nonsensical than the pile of bones getting up and going for a walk in the first place.
Fixxxer 10-12-04, 04:51 PM	Asking why a skeleton can't talk is like asking why a Roomba (http://www.irobot.com/consumer/) can't do differential equations and build you a Chrysler. Why can't a roomba do differential equations and build me a Chrysler, anyhow? :D
Purkake 10-12-04, 05:07 PM	I didn't say that they could speak perfect oxford english. I said that they CAN talk. So if the necromancer says: go and tell anyone you see: buy necros new salted knuckles, then it would go around and say that.
wereooze 10-12-04, 07:58 PM	Obviously The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra isn't required viewing here. I sleep now! :D
xmcknight 10-13-04, 12:00 AM	Didn't the skeletons in Army of Darkness talk?
Kojiro James 10-13-04, 12:45 AM	Army of Darkness is not D&D. Please, people... does "Int —" mean nothing to you people? It has no mind of its own and therefore it CAN NOT speak! Seriously, it's like trying to argue: "Why can't my toaster speak? What makes it so special??" Your toaster isn't special, because it HAS NO BRAIN!!! The same goes for the skeleton.
Incenjucar 10-13-04, 12:58 AM	There is no official ruling, therefor, it's up to the individual DMs. Saying a word has no implication in regards to understanding it, or does a parrot that says "No MSG!" have to understand the concept of monosodiumglutamate being unhealthy for you? Does a tape-recorder have intelligence?
Dakkareth 10-13-04, 10:49 AM	Please, people... does "Int —" mean nothing to you people? It has no mind of its own and therefore it CAN NOT speak! A moot point in this case as I stated clearly, that the reason for my asking was a spell, that let my necromancer PC possess his own undead just like magic jar. The result would be a skeleton with the mental stats of the wizard, which should be quite up to speaking, if the physical frame of a skeleton allows it. Now, as to the question of whether or not a mage could possess a skeleton and use it to cast spells (as was the initial question), it all depends on teh level of the possessions. Simply grabbing hold of it and manipulating it by magic would be insufficient but remotely transfering your mind into the skeleton, truly possessing it rather than simply controlling it, would suffice (all IMO of course). (see above) --- It seems to me, the votes for yes and no are evenly spread or at least there's no obvious majority for either. I'll point my DM to this thread and hope for the best - in the worst case I'd have to use silenced spells (there go my empowered fireballs). Thanks for sharing your views. :)
Purkake 10-13-04, 10:57 AM	And golems also have INT- but they always say things like yes,master and intruders have entered the complex, master.
Sulaco 10-13-04, 11:33 AM	Ahh, but what I object to is the implication inherent in your post - perhaps imagined, perhaps not - that speaking skeletons, not being "logical" or "sensible" are therefore illogical and nonsensical. Which woulf therefore reflect poorly on any DM who chose to use them. Not at all. A skeleton moves and percieves the world cos of magic, nothing more. There is nothing inherent in the skeleton that makes it possible. If you want it to be able to speak then do so - magic makes it happen - but trying to justify it as somehow being logical that the creature can do it cos it can do other things is utter bollox.
Sulaco 10-13-04, 11:35 AM	And golems also have INT- but they always say things like yes,master and intruders have entered the complex, master. They do? I've never encountered a speaking golem in my more than 20 years of D&D gaming.
Levis 10-13-04, 11:46 AM	They do? I've never encountered a speaking golem in my more than 20 years of D&D gaming. So your lack of experiance makes it so. Nice.
Purkake 10-13-04, 11:48 AM	They do? I've never encountered a speaking golem in my more than 20 years of D&D gaming. So maybe your DM(s) don't use talking golems. If skeletons see and hear by useing magic why can they still hear and see in antimagic field?
Callista 10-13-04, 08:33 PM	I use 'em. Actually, talking non-intelligent monsters are fairly common in my games--for example, the golem that asks for a password before it will allow you to pass a door, attacking you if you attempt to pass anyway. The talking skeleton that delivers a message from the necromancer that created it shouldn't be too far-fetched. Non-intelligent monsters like golems or skeletons can only speak if they have been programmed to do so; and then, they can only follow their programming. Perhaps a necromancer would have to use a Magic-mouth-esque spell on a skeleton to enable speech; but the physical problems of speech can be overcome by magic just as easily as the problem of making the thing get up and walk and fight--if not more easily.
Wil_Hyral 10-13-04, 08:54 PM	Using medical theory in this thread is making me laugh. You should probably forget about the skeleton actually doing anything except lying there, if you want to be realistic. Don't believe those misleading Halloween cartoons: skeletons can not dance in real life. :rolleyes: First of all, the monster manual doesn't describe any undead as being mute, and it would say so if it were true. Being mute is a huge trait to leave out of a stat block. Secondly, liches can cast spells and they're often depicted as little more than skeletons with some remaining flesh. Though mildly ambiguous, I'd have to rule that skeletons are capable of vocal communication, should they be given the intelligence to use in that way.
Edymnion 10-13-04, 09:59 PM	How do skeletons move? Magic animates them. What does the magic animate? The bones themselves. The bones move, thats all. There are no bones involved in speech, its all soft tissue work. (yes, you can talk without moving your lower jaw, just clench your teeth and try it) Voice is all about your soft tissue, the size and shape of your mouth/throat/voicebox. Unless you want to get on the slippery slope of "The magic that animates a skeleton is also capable of moving things other than the skeleton itself", the magic would not be able to move air directly. As in, a skeleton could not blow out a candle, and it could not speak. Otherwise, we get into things like "Why can't the necromancer send in a hundred skeletons to go inhale all the poison gas, walk it out of the room, then exhale it where its safe?" Poison wouldn't hurt the undead, and they could remove poison gas one virtual lungfull at a time. Even if you say they couldn't actually hold the gas in, a row of inhaling skeletons would be able to make a small wind tunnel to evactuate the gas by standing back to back with each other. After all, if we've said that they can magically move air at will, it opens up all kinds of cans of worms.
Palin the Wizard 10-13-04, 10:29 PM	Edymnion, now you're being silly. If a DM says that skeletons can speak, then they can speak. They still cannot inhale or exhale air (as the DM hasn't said they could). They can just speak, without the need for air at all. It's not that difficult to imagine--it's magic, after all. Even if it does ruin realism a bit, it's hardly cause for such debate. It's up to the DM. If he wants to maintain that having soft tissue--vocal cords, a mouth, lips, and a tongue--is necessary for speech, then skeletons cannot speak, barring magic that specifically makes them capable of it. If he doesn't care, there's an even chance that they *can* speak.
Edymnion 10-13-04, 10:49 PM	Edymnion, now you're being silly. If a DM says that skeletons can speak, then they can speak. They still cannot inhale or exhale air (as the DM hasn't said they could). They can just speak, without the need for air at all. It's not that difficult to imagine--it's magic, after all.Well, to speak, they must be able to move air in some manner. Otherwise, it would be telepathy. Which means the animating magic would be capable of animating things other than just the bones of a skeleton. Although, to be honest, I've had more than one skeleton cackle before, so I guess I'm being a bit hypocritical here.
Incenjucar 10-14-04, 03:22 AM	1) We don't know diddly-squat about how skeleton animation works. We don't have a really valid explanation for why they don't have massively altered stats (Honestly, you don't have any muscles or tendons getting in the way of things, so skeletons could arguably stretch their limbs out, alter their shape drastically, or work just as well as clouds of bone powder as whole bones. Personally, I think what happens is that the negative energy takes on the 'shadow' of the body's former bulk. While they can't do enough to create wind resistance for flight, basic soft tissue functions shouldn't be too hard to replicate in -some manner. 2) It's not so much air they need to move, they just need to make a vibration. We use air to -make- that vibration, which travels -through- air. Like bodies do. Or do my speakers have fans in them now?
Levis 10-14-04, 04:43 AM	How do skeletons move? Magic animates them. What does the magic animate? The bones themselves. The bones move, thats all. There are no bones involved in speech, its all soft tissue work. (yes, you can talk without moving your lower jaw, just clench your teeth and try it) Voice is all about your soft tissue, the size and shape of your mouth/throat/voicebox. By that reasoning whilst they can't talk they can communicate by morse code. That makes much more sense.
Kojiro James 10-14-04, 10:45 PM	They do? I've never encountered a speaking golem in my more than 20 years of D&D gaming. You're not alone... I've never encountered talking golems either.
Mister Mayhem 10-15-04, 03:00 AM	They are remarkably common in the D&D computer games...
Another Gnome 10-15-04, 08:55 AM	Remarkably common? I recall having seen precisely one. (Aside from the decidedly non-mindless flesh golem in HotU.)
Sulaco 10-15-04, 09:41 AM	So your lack of experiance makes it so. Nice. I don't "lack experience". I never claimed this made anything "so", I was simply responding to a particular comment. I would have thought that was patently obvious to anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex.
Sulaco 10-15-04, 09:50 AM	If skeletons see and hear by useing magic why can they still hear and see in antimagic field? :rolleyes: I will, once again, reiterate my position: Skeletons don't see or hear things, they perceive them somehow. There is no logical or sensible reason for this, it just is. If you want your skeletons to be able to speak then by all means do so - it is no more or less plausible than the thing being animate or perceiving events without any realistic means of doing so - but don't try to justify it as being logical or sensible that it should be so.
Random bloke 10-15-04, 11:05 AM	Skeletons don't see or hear things, they perceive them somehow. There is no logical or sensible reason for this, it just is. .So... if creatures of type X behave/have qualities in manner Y (regardless of how logical or plausible you precieve manner Y to be) it's neither palusible nor logical to assume that other qualities of the same creatures would be similar to Y? :confused:
Aliquid 10-15-04, 12:44 PM	So... if creatures of type X behave/have qualities in manner Y (regardless of how logical or plausible you precieve manner Y to be) it's neither palusible nor logical to assume that other qualities of the same creatures would be similar to Y? :confused: plausible? yes. Possible? yes. But you can't assume something is logically true simply because it ie plausible. Ok, lets use a real life example. Creature type X = Platypus A platypus is a mammal, yet it lays soft leathery eggs just like a reptile. Quality Y = lays eggs like reptile. Would it be logical to assume that a platypus is also cold blooded like a reptile? No it wouldn’t.
Purkake 10-15-04, 01:03 PM	These things arent really related. If the skeleton perceives the world around him why can't it use the same "magical" method to speak. If a golem(who i presume uses the same "magical" method to see the world around it) can be programmed to ask password, then why can't a skeleton?
Random bloke 10-15-04, 03:38 PM	plausible? yes. Possible? yes. But you can't assume . RL example snipped'k. My mistake - "similar qualities". For example, it would be logical to assume that the platypus is capable of holding his breath underwater (or whatever qualities other water hunting creatures have)
Seeker95 10-15-04, 07:38 PM	Still at it? By the rules, unintelligent undead have no intelligence score and know no languages. (ie, they do not have an intelligence of at least three -- the prerequisite for speaking.) Beyond that... Forget logic. Forget reality. Forget making sense. If you want it to be able to speak, let it speak. If you don't want it to be able to speak, don't let it. Anyone trying to prove they are "right" is wasting breath and looking foolish -- whichever answer they are trying to support. There is no "right"
Random bloke 10-15-04, 09:39 PM	Still at it? By the rules, unintelligent undead have no intelligence score and know no languages"The skeleton in question does have an INT score. :teach: Bah. :twitch:
Seeker95 10-15-04, 09:49 PM	The skeleton in question does have an INT score.The "skeleton in question" is not a skeleton if it has an intelligence score. If he wants to break the rules / houserule to begin with, who gives a damn what his reason for letting it speak or not might be? Like I said... there is no need to defend either answer. Once you ask the question outside the core rules, it is a house rule. All house rules are valid in your house, regardless of what any other DM might say.
Aliquid 10-15-04, 11:15 PM	The "skeleton in question" is not a skeleton if it has an intelligence score. If he wants to break the rules / houserule to begin with, who gives a damn what his reason for letting it speak or not might be? Like I said... there is no need to defend either answer. Once you ask the question outside the core rules, it is a house rule. All house rules are valid in your house, regardless of what any other DM might say. Umm.... the "skeleton in question" is indeed a skeleton. The original post was asking about possessing a skeleton. Possessing a regular run of the mill skeleton. Being possessed doesn't make the skeleton cease to be a "skeleton".
Random bloke 10-16-04, 07:55 AM	Like I said... there is no need to defend either answer. Once you ask the question outside the core rules, it is a house rule. All house rules are valid in your house, regardless of what any other DM might say.The thread has always been about whether or not it's logical/plausible for an intelligent skeleton to be able to speak. Unless, of course, "a house rule" has no need to be logical, because it's a house rule. Which is dumb, but the only way to read your post.
WizO_Catoblepas 10-16-04, 09:32 AM	Please keep the subject matter of your posts to the thred and not other guests. Otherwise, I'm going to have to close the thread and send out official warns to the offeding parties.