D&D 5E Killing a Teammate

[Ilbranteloth]

Are they "dead" dead, or "able to be ressurected" dead? Not important, just curious.

You spend some time in the fugue plain, and if you are faithful you are taken by agents of your Deity to their plain. The faithless and false are compelled to enter the city of the dead and be judged. The false serve in the city for eternity, and the faithless are mortared into the Wall of the Faithless that serves as the wall to the city where they slowly dissolve.

On the fugue plain, devils will attempt to convince you to come to the Hells, and I don't think you can be raised then. Demons periodically open portals and raid the wall to steal souls for their purposes.

Once in the wall you can't be resurrected, once judged or picked up, raise dead presumably doesn't work. In practice, none of this ever comes into play, it's always assumed that you can be raised if within the restrictions of the spell.

Ilbranteloth

 

[Lanliss]

You spend some time in the fugue plain, and if you are faithful you are taken by agents of your Deity to their plain. The faithless and false are compelled to enter the city of the dead and be judged. The false serve in the city for eternity, and the faithless are mortared into the Wall of the Faithless that serves as the wall to the city where they slowly dissolve.

On the fugue plain, devils will attempt to convince you to come to the Hells, and I don't think you can be raised then. Demons periodically open portals and raid the wall to steal souls for their purposes.

Once in the wall you can't be resurrected, once judged or picked up, raise dead presumably doesn't work. In practice, none of this ever comes into play, it's always assumed that you can be raised if within the restrictions of the spell.

Ilbranteloth

What happens post-undead? during undead you cannot be ressurected, but does the undead being killed make it so you cannot be ressurected at all, or does it free up your soul to be ressurected eventually?

 

[Ilbranteloth]

What happens post-undead? during undead you cannot be ressurected, but does the undead being killed make it so you cannot be ressurected at all, or does it free up your soul to be ressurected eventually?

I've always interpreted it to be once you're undead, you're undead. I don't think you'd be trying to raise or resurrect a still mobile undead. Others may interpret that differently, though.

Ilbranteloth

 

[Maxperson]

Pretty sure that the "at liberty" is mostly to allow for things like soul jars and what-not. RAW, there's no reason a person that dies a normally violent death (slit throat, crushed by rocks, eaten by a griffon, etc) wouldn't be at liberty.

Their god doesn't let them. A demon/devil/spirit/entity prevents it. Insert other reasons here.

So yeah, killing with the intention to resurrect is probably comparable to a medically induced coma. There's a chance of permanent death, sure, but in many cases it's still the best chance for long-term survival.

It's not possible to guarantee that they will be at liberty. Only the DM can do that.

 

[EscherEnigma]

"The GM has final authority" isn't a valid argument that a plan is bad.

 

[Maxperson]

What happens post-undead? during undead you cannot be ressurected, but does the undead being killed make it so you cannot be ressurected at all, or does it free up your soul to be ressurected eventually?

In 3e raise dead could not do it, but resurrection and true resurrection could bring back someone who was undead and then destroyed.

5e resurrection just says that they can't be undead, so if they were formerly undead and both willing and not prevented from coming back, they could be raised by that spell. 5e true resurrection doesn't even specify that they can't be undead, so they would just have to be both willing and not prevented from returning.

 

[OldSkoolRPG]

Their god doesn't let them. A demon/devil/spirit/entity prevents it. Insert other reasons here.



It's not possible to guarantee that they will be at liberty. Only the DM can do that.

Wow when I left earlier this was only on page 18 and here it is page 21 and you are still going. You were earlier arguing that the disabled character would not want to be euthanized because a cure can be guaranteed in a few months but when confronted with the argument they can also just have them resurrected you argue they can't be guaranteed to be able to do that. You pick up and drop off arguments only when they are convenient for your narrative.

 

[Maxperson]

Wow when I left earlier this was only on page 18 and here it is page 21 and you are still going. You were earlier arguing that the disabled character would not want to be euthanized because a cure can be guaranteed in a few months

That is truth. Only an insane person would opt for death.

but when confronted with the argument they can also just have them resurrected you argue they can't be guaranteed to be able to do that.

Is there something wrong with responding to a new argument?

You pick up and drop off arguments only when they are convenient for your narrative.

If you think that I should have responded to the NEW argument with the response from the OLD argument, you're just a little out of touch with how debate works.

 

[Desh-Rae-Halra]

That is truth. Only an insane person would opt for death.

A person might wish for death if they felt hopelessly trapped, hopeless being the key word. If that is 'insanity', that is just your interpretation of it.
Suggestion: Go watch this video and pay attention to the lyrics/feelings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgGTTtR0kc

 

[Maxperson]

A person might wish for death if they felt hopelessly trapped, hopeless being the key word. If that is 'insanity', that is just your interpretation of it.
Suggestion: Go watch this video and pay attention to the lyrics/feelings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgGTTtR0kc

Someone who feels so hopeless that they want to die, knowing full well that they will be fully cured in a month or two is not in their right mind.