Decapitating a Death Knight?

[Tuzenbach]

I'm under the impression that beheading a Death Knight would not kill it, as they're already dead. However, would it:


1) Blind the Death Knight? Or would the Death Knight still be able to see through it's eyes despite having it's head detatched?

2) Prevent the Death Knight from using spells which require a verbal component? Or would the Death Knight still be able to speak even though his head is on the ground next to his feet?

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Are you talking decapitation from a vorpal sword? I always thought that being undead made a critter immune to the vorpal affect.

From the SRD:

Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head...

... undead creatures other than vampires, are not affected by the loss of their heads.

 

[Tuzenbach]

Ah, thanks for that. No, not a vorpal sword, but a special invention created by one of my PCs.

So, the Death Knight would still be able to see, cast spells with his voice, etc.?

How about this: Upon being decapitated, another PC picks up the head and places in in a specially prepared iron box with a permanent "Silence" and "Darkness" cast on the inside of said box. Obviously, the PC with the box immediately closes and locks it.

Would sight and verbal spell casting be possible THEN?! LoL!

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

You can't really cut off something's head to kill it -- rather, its dead because you cut off its head, if you follow. Because damage is abstracted, you can use whatever description you want for why it has ceased to be -- decapitated, eviscerated, impaled, whatever. There are no hit locations or specific damage in D&D (except for the vorpal sword effect, which we've covered). So you can't cut off his head, all you can do is deal enough damage to kill it, at which point it can't cast spells anyway. What you do with its head once its dead is moot.

 

[Tuzenbach]

You're saying decapitation doesn't happen in D&D without a Vorpal Sword?!

Damn! There goes my brilliant invention!

OK. Let's assume the DM allowed decapitations in the campaign without the use of a Vorpal blade. Once decapitated and with his head in a box, would the Death Knight be able to cast verbal spells and have sight?

 

[BSF]

The DnD combat system, by default, is abstracted to where such things don't really happen. In affect, a Vorpal sword is a death affect with flavor (beheading the target). Now, say you had an enemy helpless and wanted to do a Coup de Grace. As a DM, I would allow an intent to "cut off his head" as the flavor of the CDG. If the opponent saves against the CDG and the damage was not enough to kill him, then I would say that you tried to cut off his head, but failed. Especially with an undead critter, it would be harder to remove their head (immune to crits), possibly because of toughened, dessicated flesh that is coursing with eldritch energies that prevent such injuries. Ie, until you do enough damage to destroy the thing, you can't cut off it's head.

However, you are asking about a specific affect, for your game, that would allow you to remove the head of an undead opponent and what the issues with that might be. IF I were to allow that, then I would certainly allow the death knight to function as if the head was "viable". Locked in a box with silence? OK, verbal components might not work. Line of sight would be hard to establish as well. However, I would be just as likely to let you take the death knight's head and run away. But, the Death Knight would still have an incorporeal head that would gradually reform a physical existence. 'Cause that would be really creepy and look nifty. In affect, you took it's head as flavor, but it didn't change the mechanics of the creature.

I expect you would not find that affect terribly appealing as a player, but there you have it.

 

[Tuzenbach]

However, you are asking about a specific affect, for your game, that would allow you to remove the head of an undead opponent and what the issues with that might be. IF I were to allow that, then I would certainly allow the death knight to function as if the head was "viable". Locked in a box with silence? OK, verbal components might not work. Line of sight would be hard to establish as well. However, I would be just as likely to let you take the death knight's head and run away. But, the Death Knight would still have an incorporeal head that would gradually reform a physical existence. 'Cause that would be really creepy and look nifty. In affect, you took it's head as flavor, but it didn't change the mechanics of the creature.

I expect you would not find that affect terribly appealing as a player, but there you have it.

Ah, thank you, Mr. BardStephenFox! This was the answer I was looking for! The thing is, without his spells, a Death Knight is just some undead guy with a couple of powers, a really good armour class, and a crap load of HP and bonuses to attack/defend/whatever. I figured that by removing his head we'd at least have a fighting chance against it.

Two things:

1) How long before the new head reforms?
2) Once the new head is reformed, does the original head sort of "melt away", or is it still functional as a part of the Death Knight, albeit locked inside an iron & magicked box?

Imagine if that was the material component for an ultra-powerful spell: "Four pints of Giant Squid ink, scales from an invisible iguana, blood from a Sphinx, and the head of a Death Knight".



Oh, and on a totally random note, there's a thread on the General Forum about a Cleric who's lost both his hands. Surely if PCs can lose body parts, monsters can too, right?!

 

[BSF]

The thread in question details the problems that the Cleric has had running through the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. This is a remake of a module from a previous edition. The Cleric has lost his hands as a result of traps. Previous editions most certainly had more ways to lose a limb, most notably the Sword of Severing. To maintain the flavor of the original adventure, the remake includes traps that can take body parts away. It is particularly vicious.

I am sure there are dozen or more house rules to handle loss of limb within a game, but by the book, it doesn't really happen.

OK, it's funny, as I was writing the bit about the head reforming, I was contemplating what I would do with a death knight's head. During my post, the best answer I could come up with was to have it decompose magically. Now, I would probably allow a party to go to some effort to prevent it from decomposing, and I would probably keep it from reforming if the PC's could do this. It still wouldn't affect the combat prowess of the death knight, but it would be kinda nifty RP and might really aggravate the Death Knight.

I could see a death knight sitting around, agitated that he lost his head. Not because it affects him overly much, but because of a "status" thing. I mean, all the other villians would laugh at him and ridicule him for losing his head and not making the people that took it pay. It could encourage some animosity, and might be fun.

The thing is, it seems like it would be more effort to try to remove a death knight's head than it would be to just take him out. Of course, that all depends on what kind of wacky mechanics you can talk your DM into. But, a lot of that starts to really come under the dominion of House Rules.

 

[Tuzenbach]

"Taking out" the Death Knight, at the level we're at, is an impossibility.

You see, I've a DM who does some rather interesting things. Whenenver I'm the DM, I always do my best to fill the adventure with creatures I know the PCs will have a good chance of defeating.

However........

When our party was 2nd level, there all of a sudden was a werewolf! How does one defeat a werewolf without magical weapons and but a couple of magic-missiles? It can't be done, so we ended up climbing a few trees and waiting for the thing to go away. Including the NPCs, there were like, eleven of us up four trees! Funny stuff.

Fast forward to the Death Knight. "Erm, Mr. Dungeon Master? We're only 5th level!" That's right. About a dozen 5th level dudes faced with the prospect of a castle holding a fabulous treasure and a Death Knight. It's already killed a couple of us. In the interim(sp), between the werewolf at 2nd level and the Death Knight at 5th were the Demons and their pet Clay Golem! Nice DM, eh? LoL

 

[dcollins]

Ah, thanks for that. No, not a vorpal sword, but a special invention created by one of my PCs.

So, the Death Knight would still be able to see, cast spells with his voice, etc.?

How about this: Upon being decapitated, another PC picks up the head and places in in a specially prepared iron box with a permanent "Silence" and "Darkness" cast on the inside of said box. Obviously, the PC with the box immediately closes and locks it.

If you're using House Ruled items or abilities that can cause decapitation, then you're outside the core rules, and the DM needs to decide exactly what the effects are. The DMG "Variant: Damage to Specific Areas" says "This sort of rule puts a lot of pressure on the DM to create ad hoc rulings."

If a Death Knight loses it's head, I would probably say that it can still see, cast spells, and direct its body still -- maybe pick up its head and carry it around for a while. However, I wouldn't allow a mundane decapitation device in the first place.

If the head got put in a magical Dark, Silenced box, then I would say that it loses the ability to direct its body or cast spells. However, I wouldn't allow such an item in the first place, because it's neither an official magic item, nor are Darkness or Silence on the approved list of Permancy-able spells.