D&D 5E Can I use animate dead to reanimate a zombie that has been killed?

[niklinna]

You cant be undead, AND dead.

Careful! "You can't be both alive and dead" is how we got undead to begin with. What new monstrosity have you just unleashed??

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Careful! "You can't be both alive and dead" is how we got undead to begin with. What new monstrosity have you just unleashed??

Oh no! Un-dead Undead: The Indead!

 

[niklinna]

Animate dead requires a corpse of a medium or small humanoid or a pile of bones. So if I use animate dead on say a dead human to make a zombie and that zombie is subsequently killed, can I raise the same corpse again.

I can see this going either way - The corpse was at one point humanoid, but now is it an "undead corpse" instead of a "humanoid corpse"

Well, to actually address the question instead of lobbing side jokes....

As several have said, ultimately the decision is your DM's. (Based on your other recent posts I strongly suspect you are not the DM.)

From the "does it make sense?" angle: It's magic in a fantasy world. You (or rather, your DM) can construct a number of different but more or less consistent arguments that fit in the gaps left by the actual spell description and other rules text about undead. If that matters to you/your DM.

From the "is it cool?" angle: Obviously! Keep raising that same zombie over and over until it's too bashed or hacked up for more! The point at which that happens, and why, are, once again, up to your DM. Maybe the zombie's max hit points drop a bit each time your animate it, maybe it's a matter of the narrative presented in combat (bludgeoned to paste, slashed to bits, pierced to...?). And then you can roleplay how reused zombies are great for stews because they're super-tenderized. (What? You're already a necromancer, cannibalism's not a stretch*).

From the "is it fair?" angle: Eh, you're burning a spell slot, and the cast time is a minute, so you won't be keeping the thing going indefinitely in a fight. Necromancers have it hard enough in D&D.

I hope these comments help you frame your question to your DM in such a way that they give you the answer you want!

Spoiler: The asterisk!

True story: I once played a character who got possessed by the spirit of a necromancer's apprentice, who had transgressed somehow and his master slowly whittled away bits of him and made him eat them.

 

[Tonguez]

Well, to actually address the question instead of lobbing side jokes..... And then you can roleplay how reused zombies are great for stews because they're super-tenderized. (What? You're already a necromancer, cannibalism's not a stretch*).

From the "is it fair?" angle: Eh, you're burning a spell slot, and the cast time is a minute,

Spoiler: The asterisk!

True story: I once played a character who got possessed by the spirit of a necromancer's apprentice, who had transgressed somehow and his master slowly whittled away bits of him and made him eat them.

I remember reading a novel in which a necromancer living in the mountains would kill people, animate their corpses and direct the zombies to bury themselves in the snow - the bodies would thus be frozen and be available as his winter meat supply

 

[Flamestrike]

AFAIK 'humanoid corpse' is not a thing that the rules recognise either.

That's utterly irrelevant. Plain english trumps that rubbish.

A dead creature, is no longer undead. It literally, by any definition, cant be.

 

[Flamestrike]

I've always used the term Destroy. You can't kill an undead because it's not alive. You can only kill something that is alive. You can destroy it, though. And, to me, Once it's destroyed, it's simply a corpse again.

Which, for the purpose of the OP makes me think, if the corpse is sufficiently destroyed, it'd be difficult to make another zombie, but you could still make a skeleton out of the pile of bones.

I can get behind the idea that the corpse is sufficiently messed up to no longer be a valid target for animate dead.

I cant get behind am interpretation that leads to 'dead undead'. That simply does not compute, and if your interpretation leads to an absurd result, the error is most likely with your interpretation.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That's utterly irrelevant. Plain english trumps that rubbish.

A dead creature, is no longer undead. It literally, by any definition, cant be.

And that's a very good reason to rule in certain way. But I was trying to outline what the rules actually say. And rules do not use these terms in plain English sense. Plain English meaning and D&D rules definition of 'humanoid' don't align either.

Also, if you think that a slain zombie becomes 'a humanoid corpse' what happens if one casts revivify or raise dead on it?

I can get behind the idea that the corpse is sufficiently messed up to no longer be a valid target for animate dead.

That's the actual reason I'd rule it can't be done. Plus wanting the necromancers to have a need for new corpses.

 

[Tonguez]

That's utterly irrelevant. Plain english trumps that rubbish.

A dead creature, is no longer undead. It literally, by any definition, cant be.

True which is why undead a destroyed not killed, so sure a destroyed undead isnt dead

 

[ECMO3]

Right. But if it is an object, it is no longer a humanoid either. So by that logic the spell literally can never do anything!

It does not have to be a humanoid, it needs to be a corpse of a humanoid.

 

[Stormonu]

Erfworld. Wasn't that the extremely cool webcomic where the writer kept firing his artists?

Erfworld! I'd read that comic ages ago and have been trying to find it for ages! Thanks!