Maybe I'm over-complicating this, but since 'Speak With Dead' doesn't work on undead, is it feasible for a character to 'Remove Curse' on a defeated undead, THEN 'Speak With Dead'? Or is the first step even necessary since the undead has been, um...killed? Thanks for all feedback!
My personal off-the-cuff-DM-ruling would be that the animating force which powers the Undead is interfering with the soul of the body's original occupant, or blocking it from re-occupying that body - and thus they can't answer the questions of the caster.
If the Undead had been destroyed in combat, without completely destroying the body, then the soul of the original occupant could re-occupy the body, but that soul would know nothing of what the body had done or experienced since that soul died.
You could not use Speak with Undead to discover where the Undead creature had come from, who created it, controlled it, or anything about the Undead's unlife.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
This is how I saw it too, that the party might be able to glean clues from whatever the undead’s final moments were as a living person. So, in your opinion, you think the ‘Speak With Dead’ on its own can get them there? I really appreciate your input here.
If it were a ruling in my game, I'd give them the information from a straight up Speak with the Dead spell - no need for Remove Curse.
But a case can be made for you as DM requiring Remove Curse first. It really boils down to how much of a barrier between the Players and the Information the DM wants to impose.
If you're the DM here designing an adventure, I'd say judge how critical the information is that the Undead is going to have. If it's trivial, or it's a actually very important to the Players being able to progress in the adventure, I'd keep the barrier low ( one spell only ).
If the information is not that important to the main adventure, but would convey a great benefit to the Players ( say, the person wielded a significant magic item that would be of great benefit to their Players on the adventure, and they stashed it somewhere before they were killed ), I might want more of a barrier between the Players and the Information ( higher reward = higher effort ).
However, once I'd made that ruling ( whether or not you need to cast Remove Curse before Speak with Undead, or not ), that would now be canon, and that's the way it would work in that campaign from that point forward.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Maybe I'm over-complicating this, but since 'Speak With Dead' doesn't work on undead, is it feasible for a character to 'Remove Curse' on a defeated undead, THEN 'Speak With Dead'? Or is the first step even necessary since the undead has been, um...killed? Thanks for all feedback!
Interesting question :)
My personal off-the-cuff-DM-ruling would be that the animating force which powers the Undead is interfering with the soul of the body's original occupant, or blocking it from re-occupying that body - and thus they can't answer the questions of the caster.
If the Undead had been destroyed in combat, without completely destroying the body, then the soul of the original occupant could re-occupy the body, but that soul would know nothing of what the body had done or experienced since that soul died.
You could not use Speak with Undead to discover where the Undead creature had come from, who created it, controlled it, or anything about the Undead's unlife.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
This is how I saw it too, that the party might be able to glean clues from whatever the undead’s final moments were as a living person. So, in your opinion, you think the ‘Speak With Dead’ on its own can get them there? I really appreciate your input here.
If it were a ruling in my game, I'd give them the information from a straight up Speak with the Dead spell - no need for Remove Curse.
But a case can be made for you as DM requiring Remove Curse first. It really boils down to how much of a barrier between the Players and the Information the DM wants to impose.
If you're the DM here designing an adventure, I'd say judge how critical the information is that the Undead is going to have. If it's trivial, or it's a actually very important to the Players being able to progress in the adventure, I'd keep the barrier low ( one spell only ).
If the information is not that important to the main adventure, but would convey a great benefit to the Players ( say, the person wielded a significant magic item that would be of great benefit to their Players on the adventure, and they stashed it somewhere before they were killed ), I might want more of a barrier between the Players and the Information ( higher reward = higher effort ).
However, once I'd made that ruling ( whether or not you need to cast Remove Curse before Speak with Undead, or not ), that would now be canon, and that's the way it would work in that campaign from that point forward.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
You make me feel smarter! Game time soon, thanks for your take!