Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6694132" data-attributes="member: 92511">According to what you've quoted above, the book says you need &quot;...a resurrection&nbsp; spell...&quot; Small r, which all spells in 5e are I'll grant you, and no italics, as Dausuul notes....Because there are TWO. There is Resurrection and there is True Resurrection. You need &quot;a&quot;...or, in other words, &quot;one&quot; of them...the True Resurrection spell in which, as noted, there is no text against using it on an undead creature.In the case of a zombie (or any other creature), we also have the fun fact that an undead creature IS NOT the soul/spirit of what/who that creature was in life. They are driven/fueled/inhabited/however you want to define it by necrotic energy. That's what's functioning there, in a zombie. In the case of &quot;free-willed undead&quot; [which is something of an oxymoron, and might be more accurately described as simply &quot;willed undead&quot; to differentiate them from &quot;mindless undead&quot; like zombies and skeletons], such as wights or vampires, they are similarly not who/what they were in life, but minds and spirits that have been overrun/driven to madness by the necrotic energies or evil spirits taking over and warping the individual spirit with &quot;inhuman&quot; drives (soaking up &quot;life force,&quot; in most cases) that fuel them. Hence the need/stipulation for resurrection [small &quot;r&quot;, no italics] requiring the willingness of the creature's soul/spirit to return to life. Long story short...this seems another case of seeing [deliberate or not] &quot;vagueness&quot; where none exists. You need &quot;A resurrection spell&quot;...that spell is True Resurrection. Reading comprehension FTW. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool&nbsp; &nbsp; :cool:"&nbsp; data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" />EDIT to add my new post disclaimer: In case it's not obvious and/or for the thick of skull or thin of skin, as with all posts on the interwebs, all of the above should be read/taken as &quot;IMNSHO&quot; and is not intended as insult or attack to anyone involved with this thread. /EDIT</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6694132, member: 92511"] According to what you've quoted above, the book says you need "...[I]a[/I] resurrection spell..." Small [I]r[/I], which all spells in 5e are I'll grant you, and no italics, as Dausuul notes. ...Because there are TWO. There is Resurrection and there is True Resurrection. You need "a"...or, in other words, "one" of them...the True Resurrection spell in which, as noted, there is no text against using it on an undead creature. In the case of a zombie (or any other creature), we also have the fun fact that an undead creature IS NOT the soul/spirit of what/who that creature was in life. They are driven/fueled/inhabited/however you want to define it by necrotic energy. That's what's functioning there, in a zombie. In the case of "free-willed undead" [which is something of an oxymoron, and might be more accurately described as simply "willed undead" to differentiate them from "mindless undead" like zombies and skeletons], such as wights or vampires, they are similarly not who/what they were in life, but minds and spirits that have been overrun/driven to madness by the necrotic energies or evil spirits taking over and warping the individual spirit with "inhuman" drives (soaking up "life force," in most cases) that fuel them. Hence the need/stipulation for resurrection [small "r", no italics] requiring the willingness of the creature's soul/spirit to return to life. Long story short...this seems another case of seeing [deliberate or not] "vagueness" where none exists. You need "[I]A[/I] resurrection spell"...that spell is True Resurrection. Reading comprehension FTW. :cool: EDIT to add my new post disclaimer:[I] In case it's not obvious and/or for the thick of skull or thin of skin, as with all posts on the interwebs, all of the above should be read/taken as "IMNSHO" and is not intended as insult or attack to anyone involved with this thread. [/I]/EDIT [/QUOTE]

Verification