Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 1731389" data-attributes="member: 18280">Admittedly, I am looking at 3.0 right now, but the wording in that book for ressurection is &quot;any deceased creature&quot; whereas the wording in speak with dead is &quot;a corpse&quot; and animate dead specifies &quot;the bones or bodies of dead creatures&quot; (emphasis mine).&nbsp; Again, it appears that the distinction in WotC is clear.Lest there be any doubt, resurrection goes on to specify that &quot;The condition of the remains is not a factor.&nbsp; So long as some small portion of the creature's body exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death.&quot;Compare this to &quot;...but the body must be mostly intact to bbe able to respond.&nbsp; A damaged corpse may be able to give partial answers or partially correct answers, but it must at least have a mouth in order to speak at all.&quot;Clearly, the bodily conditions for resurrection and speak with dead are not even remotely similar, apart from both dealing with dead people.&nbsp; Equally obviously, this makes your comment specious at best.You will also note that a partial corpse can give only partially correct, or partial answers.&nbsp; This seems to imply that the information given resides in the body rather than the spirit of the creature questioned.&nbsp; One would assume it resides in the creature's brain.&nbsp; If this is the case, then DM-Rocco's ruling is actually quite generous, as a skeleton has no brain at all!&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> Perhaps things are different in 3.5.&nbsp; Perhaps your book is different than mine.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 1731389, member: 18280"] Admittedly, I am looking at 3.0 right now, but the wording in that book for [I]ressurection[/I] is "any deceased creature" whereas the wording in [I]speak with dead[/I] is "a corpse" and animate dead specifies "the bones [SIZE=5][I][B]or[/B][/I][/SIZE] bodies of dead creatures" (emphasis mine). Again, it appears that the distinction in WotC is clear. Lest there be any doubt, [I]resurrection[/I] goes on to specify that "The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature's body exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death." Compare this to "...but the body must be mostly intact to bbe able to respond. A damaged corpse may be able to give partial answers or partially correct answers, but it must at least have a mouth in order to speak at all." Clearly, the bodily conditions for [I]resurrection[/I] and [I]speak with dead [/I] are not even remotely similar, apart from both dealing with dead people. Equally obviously, this makes your comment specious at best. You will also note that a partial corpse can give only partially correct, or partial answers. This seems to imply that the information given resides in the body rather than the spirit of the creature questioned. One would assume it resides in the creature's brain. If this is the case, then DM-Rocco's ruling is actually quite generous, as a skeleton has no brain at all! :D Perhaps things are different in 3.5. Perhaps your book is different than mine. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification