-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Do Undead Still Have Souls?
- Thread starter LuYangShih
- Start date
Wow. So, uh, Sigil...that was just off-the-cuff, huh? I've cut-and-pasted a copy into my gaming stuff folder, to peruse at greater length later, if you don't mind. That's good stuff.
One thing I refer to in answering the question of "where is an undead cretures' soul" is an idea that comes up a lot in Eastern philosophies, and in Egyptian mythology; that people have two souls. One which goes on to an afterlife, and one that "stays behind" somehow. One soul often has the being's memories and personality, the other has its' core Essense, so to speak.
In my game, I've simplified some of these ideas, and tweaked 'em. The two souls are called many things in many languages, but they translate to "heart-soul" and "mind-soul". The heart-soul binds the being to the Earth/prime plane, and when the being dies, this soul remains. The Mind-soul's final task is to guide the heart-soul back to Nwth (gaia, basically), where it rests until it is reincarnated. The mind-soul passes on to the outer planes. Undead happen when there is some disruption to this pattern. Ghosts are formed when the mind-soul has its' own agenda, and refuses to guide the heart-soul home. Liches banish their heart-soul from their bodies, and exist as creatures of pure Mind. You can't be brought back from the dead unless both halves of the soul are in their proper place.
Now I have to go back to the Sigil's treatise on elemental/existenial waveform-energy, and its' place in the formation of Soul, and figure out how this all ties together. This will take me a while, and my brains may end up leaking form my ears before I'm finished. But I'll have fun doing it...
[edited to fix silly typos]
One thing I refer to in answering the question of "where is an undead cretures' soul" is an idea that comes up a lot in Eastern philosophies, and in Egyptian mythology; that people have two souls. One which goes on to an afterlife, and one that "stays behind" somehow. One soul often has the being's memories and personality, the other has its' core Essense, so to speak.
In my game, I've simplified some of these ideas, and tweaked 'em. The two souls are called many things in many languages, but they translate to "heart-soul" and "mind-soul". The heart-soul binds the being to the Earth/prime plane, and when the being dies, this soul remains. The Mind-soul's final task is to guide the heart-soul back to Nwth (gaia, basically), where it rests until it is reincarnated. The mind-soul passes on to the outer planes. Undead happen when there is some disruption to this pattern. Ghosts are formed when the mind-soul has its' own agenda, and refuses to guide the heart-soul home. Liches banish their heart-soul from their bodies, and exist as creatures of pure Mind. You can't be brought back from the dead unless both halves of the soul are in their proper place.
Now I have to go back to the Sigil's treatise on elemental/existenial waveform-energy, and its' place in the formation of Soul, and figure out how this all ties together. This will take me a while, and my brains may end up leaking form my ears before I'm finished. But I'll have fun doing it...
[edited to fix silly typos]
Last edited:
LuYangShih
First Post
Well, I did not expect that much of a detailed response. 
I'll try and reply to all the other posts here in a few hours, thanks for all the ideas.
I'll try and reply to all the other posts here in a few hours, thanks for all the ideas.Saeviomagy
Adventurer
From the description of the spell "speak with dead", it's quite clear that SOMETHING stays in the body that contains the sum total of everything it knows, along with some modicum of it's personality. The spell very specifically states that the soul of those spoken with is not contacted in any way.
However it also says that the body, which is containing 'imprinted' knowledge, cannot learn.
To me, this would suggest that skeletons etc are something simpler than this - they are merely motive force, nothing more. Otherwise one would expect that they would have personality, and the ability to think (which they do not, with an int of -). Also, it shows that animation of a corpse is perfectly possible without it being [evil], and in addition, it's possible to do without disturbing the soul.
Furthermore, it suggests that intelligent undead (and creatures which are possessed) should retain all the knowledge from their previous life, unless this 'imprinted knowledge' is somehow destroyed.
Finally, it would suggest that an undead would not be able to learn new things unless it were inhabited by something which is capable of learning.
Personally, I think that the [evil] descriptor on animate dead (along with the fact that evil priests command undead and channel negative energy) is either
a) Purely cultural.
b) Purely game-balance.
In other words the descriptors should not be there. An evil cleric should be capable of being positively aligned, and vice versa, and the only real restrictions should be whether your god and culture supports this. Animating unintelligent dead creatures may well be distasteful or taboo to certain cultures, but I can't see why it should be a broad-band 'evil' act. In fact, I believe planescape presents a culture in which the animation of your corpse after death is a right which can be traded, and only a minimal stigma applies to that.
However it also says that the body, which is containing 'imprinted' knowledge, cannot learn.
To me, this would suggest that skeletons etc are something simpler than this - they are merely motive force, nothing more. Otherwise one would expect that they would have personality, and the ability to think (which they do not, with an int of -). Also, it shows that animation of a corpse is perfectly possible without it being [evil], and in addition, it's possible to do without disturbing the soul.
Furthermore, it suggests that intelligent undead (and creatures which are possessed) should retain all the knowledge from their previous life, unless this 'imprinted knowledge' is somehow destroyed.
Finally, it would suggest that an undead would not be able to learn new things unless it were inhabited by something which is capable of learning.
Personally, I think that the [evil] descriptor on animate dead (along with the fact that evil priests command undead and channel negative energy) is either
a) Purely cultural.
b) Purely game-balance.
In other words the descriptors should not be there. An evil cleric should be capable of being positively aligned, and vice versa, and the only real restrictions should be whether your god and culture supports this. Animating unintelligent dead creatures may well be distasteful or taboo to certain cultures, but I can't see why it should be a broad-band 'evil' act. In fact, I believe planescape presents a culture in which the animation of your corpse after death is a right which can be traded, and only a minimal stigma applies to that.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
The Sigil: Ethereal matter more-or-less has to be able to simulate any real matter, as it's possible for a real creature to be transferred there, and anything transferred there works as normal. Furthermore, the ethereal is... pretty much everywhere - all the planes etc. It's not a distinct form of matter (I don't think) it's a place for matter to be.
A ghost would be a recreation of the original body, only on the ethereal plane. Traditionally, the ethereal was the portal to the outer planes (right?). So a ghost means that the soul started it's movement towards it's own alignment plane, but became stuck for some reason, and instead of forming a petitioner body on it's alignment plane, formed it's analogue on the ethereal.
Perhaps it's the reason why there is no 'neutral' alignment plane? Perhaps it IS the 'neutral' alignment plane? And ghosts get stuck there because their focus on something overrides the influence of good/evil/law/chaos matter?
Perhaps an elemental's 'soul' dissipates because they are typically already on the plane which most corresponds with their own essence? And the chaotic nature of the astral makes linking up the appropriate soul from the prime extremely difficult?
A ghost would be a recreation of the original body, only on the ethereal plane. Traditionally, the ethereal was the portal to the outer planes (right?). So a ghost means that the soul started it's movement towards it's own alignment plane, but became stuck for some reason, and instead of forming a petitioner body on it's alignment plane, formed it's analogue on the ethereal.
Perhaps it's the reason why there is no 'neutral' alignment plane? Perhaps it IS the 'neutral' alignment plane? And ghosts get stuck there because their focus on something overrides the influence of good/evil/law/chaos matter?
Perhaps an elemental's 'soul' dissipates because they are typically already on the plane which most corresponds with their own essence? And the chaotic nature of the astral makes linking up the appropriate soul from the prime extremely difficult?
Last edited:
cptg1481
First Post
Question for the Group
Here is an actual in game issue that happened to a character of mine.
His name was Zonk, he was a 1/2 Orc ranger, who because of a wretched childhood and other things was NE. (Please reserve the anti-evil campaign/player judgement please) He was a slave, brutalized and treated like an animal for some 15 years. he unlike most fantasy characters when faced with his freedom chose instead of a rosey life of righting wrongs and freeing the oppressed a different path. He decided that no one would ever get the best of him again. Further he would have anything he desired, regardless of the cost. He would use his strength (20) to this end.
I played him as selfish and violent, capable of manipulating others through force or coersion to to get what he wanted. (As a side note...for those who think evil = phsycotic he did have a sense of loyalty to his adventure group and while he surely would not die for them he honestly enjoyed thier company and appreciated that he could have much more of what he wanted by continuing his relationship with them. )
Anyway, in the course of his adventure career in particular facing a group of vampires. One group had placed a gueas (sp), or compulsion on the low willed, party barbarian to remove a rival gang of undead. In a spectacular confrontation (well played and machinated by the DM) the group, being both clearly out classed and out gunned was going to have to assist thier barbarian in this cause, it was either this or death.
At a pivitol point the female vampire leader offered eternal life and awsome power (read - become a vampire) to my guy along with the others.....what do you think a guy who wanted be powerful enough to outclass most of the world do? This along with that there was the "what better way to swing the balance of power to our side" argument. He felt that his decision to accept was the best possible way to tip the odds in the favor of the party. Soooooo......he did it. He drank some potion (the mechanics of which are not important) and bam he's back the next night a vampire.....
To make a long story short...this was the brekdown of this particular game. The DM desided after that that he didn't want an evil game. Ergo, me being a vampire was out. I decided not to game with that DM after that. However, that is not the point, its a done deal, I'm not looking for support or critisism of my choicecor view.
My question was this....since my guy was NE anyway, and made the choise to "undie" willingly what were the implications for his soul? Could I still play the guy...did he have the volition to be a viable character. (understanding that he was beholden to the particular vampress of course) I mean was he a suped up version of himself minus a hearbeat? Just wondering what the thoughts are.
In my game I'd say fine to someone whe "became" undead under this or any other process that made them a "higher" or intelligent undead. I this particular case the guy would have been elated with his newfound power.
Any thoughts on the disposition of his 1) memories/skills, 2) soul, 3) emotions, 4) hopes, and finally his dreams and goals?
Thanks in advance.....
Here is an actual in game issue that happened to a character of mine.
His name was Zonk, he was a 1/2 Orc ranger, who because of a wretched childhood and other things was NE. (Please reserve the anti-evil campaign/player judgement please) He was a slave, brutalized and treated like an animal for some 15 years. he unlike most fantasy characters when faced with his freedom chose instead of a rosey life of righting wrongs and freeing the oppressed a different path. He decided that no one would ever get the best of him again. Further he would have anything he desired, regardless of the cost. He would use his strength (20) to this end.
I played him as selfish and violent, capable of manipulating others through force or coersion to to get what he wanted. (As a side note...for those who think evil = phsycotic he did have a sense of loyalty to his adventure group and while he surely would not die for them he honestly enjoyed thier company and appreciated that he could have much more of what he wanted by continuing his relationship with them. )
Anyway, in the course of his adventure career in particular facing a group of vampires. One group had placed a gueas (sp), or compulsion on the low willed, party barbarian to remove a rival gang of undead. In a spectacular confrontation (well played and machinated by the DM) the group, being both clearly out classed and out gunned was going to have to assist thier barbarian in this cause, it was either this or death.
At a pivitol point the female vampire leader offered eternal life and awsome power (read - become a vampire) to my guy along with the others.....what do you think a guy who wanted be powerful enough to outclass most of the world do? This along with that there was the "what better way to swing the balance of power to our side" argument. He felt that his decision to accept was the best possible way to tip the odds in the favor of the party. Soooooo......he did it. He drank some potion (the mechanics of which are not important) and bam he's back the next night a vampire.....
To make a long story short...this was the brekdown of this particular game. The DM desided after that that he didn't want an evil game. Ergo, me being a vampire was out. I decided not to game with that DM after that. However, that is not the point, its a done deal, I'm not looking for support or critisism of my choicecor view.
My question was this....since my guy was NE anyway, and made the choise to "undie" willingly what were the implications for his soul? Could I still play the guy...did he have the volition to be a viable character. (understanding that he was beholden to the particular vampress of course) I mean was he a suped up version of himself minus a hearbeat? Just wondering what the thoughts are.
In my game I'd say fine to someone whe "became" undead under this or any other process that made them a "higher" or intelligent undead. I this particular case the guy would have been elated with his newfound power.
Any thoughts on the disposition of his 1) memories/skills, 2) soul, 3) emotions, 4) hopes, and finally his dreams and goals?
Thanks in advance.....
s/LaSH
First Post
Right, I wondered about the terms we're using here, so I asked a guy with a degree in theology (he's also a Catholic priest; highly qualified there, I think). Here's what he had to say.
There are two models under which you can refer to souls: the Greek, and the Judaeo-Christian.
Under the antique Greek model, there is the body, and there is the soul. The soul is kinda the lifeforce-identity thing (I believe it's called psyche in ancient Greek, whence we get the word psychic as well as psychology).
Under the Judaeo-Christian model, there is the body, the soul, and the spirit. The soul is what animates living things. The spirit is a fragment of God itself. (Divine gender indeterminacy intentional.) Animals do not have spirits. Logically, therefore, higher functions of intelligence are spirit-related.
Further information: Angels do not have souls.
This creates a charming mess that needs to be resolved.
Under the Grecian model, an intelligent undead would either be a corruption of the original soul or a negative energy duplicate that uses some kind of impression left within the body. Most people seem to be using this archaic model.
Under the Judaeo-Christian model (only a couple thousand years old), an intelligent undead can simply replace the soul with a negative energy duplicate. The spirit can then remain, retaining identity and so forth. If it does depart the body, where do residual life skills like language come from? The back part of the brain?
Anybody want to poke this can of worms any harder?
(Yay, I got the post through without a kernel32 crash!)
There are two models under which you can refer to souls: the Greek, and the Judaeo-Christian.
Under the antique Greek model, there is the body, and there is the soul. The soul is kinda the lifeforce-identity thing (I believe it's called psyche in ancient Greek, whence we get the word psychic as well as psychology).
Under the Judaeo-Christian model, there is the body, the soul, and the spirit. The soul is what animates living things. The spirit is a fragment of God itself. (Divine gender indeterminacy intentional.) Animals do not have spirits. Logically, therefore, higher functions of intelligence are spirit-related.
Further information: Angels do not have souls.
This creates a charming mess that needs to be resolved.
Under the Grecian model, an intelligent undead would either be a corruption of the original soul or a negative energy duplicate that uses some kind of impression left within the body. Most people seem to be using this archaic model.
Under the Judaeo-Christian model (only a couple thousand years old), an intelligent undead can simply replace the soul with a negative energy duplicate. The spirit can then remain, retaining identity and so forth. If it does depart the body, where do residual life skills like language come from? The back part of the brain?
Anybody want to poke this can of worms any harder?
(Yay, I got the post through without a kernel32 crash!)
LuYangShih
First Post
Alright, these seem to be the thoughts so far:
1. Undead are a type of Demonic Parasite that inhabits once living beings, suffusing them with Negative Energy and displacing their soul. The Buffyverse theory. The soul of the being that previously inhabited the body is now free, and probably in the Outer Planes somewhere.
2. Undead are another being of some kind, but in this theory, they are not Demonic, and the soul of the previous being is either trapped in the body (the 1E life force theory) or tormented by the knowledge of what has happened to them/their body.
3. Undead are the same being they always were, except that they now use negative energy to sustain their existence, instead of positive energy. If the Undead is ever killed, the soul is sent to the Negative Energy plane where a very nasty fate awaits them. You don't wanna be turned into Undead in a world where this theory is the law. Sigils Theory.
4. The Mind-Body-Spirit are all interconnected, and the perversion or removal of one or more of these three things is what causes Undead to exist. The imprint of memories exists in bodies, and while the soul/spirit no longer is present in the Undead, it still retains all it's knowledge and skills because the body itself retains those memories. This seems to originate from the Egyptian Afterlife theory, so I'll call it that.
It's pretty much agreed non sentient Undead do not retain the soul/spirit of the being they previously were, so let's lay that issue to rest. Although, it would be good to remember that in some theories, the spirit/soul of the beings body who was reanimated would be tormented by the knowledge of what had happened. This would give credence to why the Animate Dead spells are considered evil, as well.
I'll give my opinion on all the theories as soon as I have some time, and if I missed any theories, feel free to point them out. This is great stuff guys, thanks for giving me all these ideas.
1. Undead are a type of Demonic Parasite that inhabits once living beings, suffusing them with Negative Energy and displacing their soul. The Buffyverse theory. The soul of the being that previously inhabited the body is now free, and probably in the Outer Planes somewhere.
2. Undead are another being of some kind, but in this theory, they are not Demonic, and the soul of the previous being is either trapped in the body (the 1E life force theory) or tormented by the knowledge of what has happened to them/their body.
3. Undead are the same being they always were, except that they now use negative energy to sustain their existence, instead of positive energy. If the Undead is ever killed, the soul is sent to the Negative Energy plane where a very nasty fate awaits them. You don't wanna be turned into Undead in a world where this theory is the law. Sigils Theory.
4. The Mind-Body-Spirit are all interconnected, and the perversion or removal of one or more of these three things is what causes Undead to exist. The imprint of memories exists in bodies, and while the soul/spirit no longer is present in the Undead, it still retains all it's knowledge and skills because the body itself retains those memories. This seems to originate from the Egyptian Afterlife theory, so I'll call it that.
It's pretty much agreed non sentient Undead do not retain the soul/spirit of the being they previously were, so let's lay that issue to rest. Although, it would be good to remember that in some theories, the spirit/soul of the beings body who was reanimated would be tormented by the knowledge of what had happened. This would give credence to why the Animate Dead spells are considered evil, as well.
I'll give my opinion on all the theories as soon as I have some time, and if I missed any theories, feel free to point them out. This is great stuff guys, thanks for giving me all these ideas.
Similar Threads
