Need some help with a ruling: (I'd love to find a Sage Advice ruling on Revivify and "restore missing body parts" but I can't find one)
Player has an illithid tadpole for over 24 hours. I'm ruling there is some permanent brain damage so far (e.g. cortex is gone, eliminated).
Question: Can the players just kill the person, "wound" enough of the brain material to be rid of the tadpole (which I will rule would have to be VERY extensive damage) and then REVIVIFY the person back to 100%, raised perfection?
Follow up: how much damaged brain qualifies for it to be a "missing body part"?
People get stuck on the interpretation of Revivify's wording: "nor can it restore any missing body parts".
My thoughts: the spirit of the 3rd level spell was not to allow people to come back to life if parts of their brain are missing and/or directly targeted with attacks that would leave the brain matter more or less mush.
Looking for a very literal, "sage advice" type answer if possible.
I'm not sure you are going to get a specific RAW or even sage advice answer to your question as it has a lot of "DM should adjudicate" stuff in it, but a few things from the text:
1) the process of Ceremorphosis takes a week, so your player is 1/7th through the process.
2) No textual mechanic is given for the process other than the tadpole is devouring the brain and changing the body.
3) it is possible for the process to be interrupted and halted (see one of the possible origins of an Aberrant Mind Sorcerer in Tasha's)
4) Revivify doesn't restore missing body parts, but it does repair damaged ones presumably, as it brings a creature back to life and restores one hitpoint (and the most common form of death for PC's is injury, so if the spell didn't heal the injury you'd be back at square one).
5) while not related to ceremorphosis, in Volos there is a process given for becoming a thrall of the mindflayer, which involves stripping the victims mind of its core personality, memories, and has a mechanical effect of first halving intelligence, then adding 1d6 at the end of the process. This process is reversed through 3 days of healing magic (heal, regenerate, and greater restoration applied once a day each) This is not related, but a possible similar mechanic to "crib" for a ruling
6) also unrelated, but possibly useful, is the Mind Flayer's extract brain ability, which deals 10d10 damage
So, and this is extrapolation and a suggestion, not a RAW ruling. If you as DM rule that the brain has not been fully devoured yet, and as DM you rule that the tadpole could be extracted forcibly, you could have the party effect surgery to remove it without killing them, with Revivify as a backup in case it goes awry. I would recommend a series of high DC medicine checks and an amount of time spent for "surgery" with the success (or failure) of the check determining how much damage the PC takes as part of the surgery. Treat it like death saves, If they succeed three times first, they deal 10d10 damage (extract the brain) to the player but extract the tadpole. If they fail three times first, they deal the damage, lose the time, and possibly destroy/damage the brain further. Either way, if the player dies, Revivify would work to bring them back to life if the brain hasn't been destroyed fully. Otherwise, they will need a better spell.
Now, once the tadpole is removed and the player healed, what is the end result? you could use the thrall rules in that the creatures intelligence is halved (or worse, if the check was failed at least once) until some amount of high level healing is applied (possible quest to find a healer, ingredients). You could force the creature to adopt a level or two of aberrant mind sorcerer. Or they could lose their memories or certain skills/proficiencies until they are healed. That part is more or less up to you.
Regarding how much of a brain can be removed until it is considered "missing" I'd say there are two ways to adjudicate. One would be what is missing is missing, so the PC might be alive after Revivify but comatose, or be without certain memories or abilities. The other would be to say its damaged, but not missing, until it is completely removed/destroyed, then (presumably) Revivify would restore the damage (including the missing pieces)
Even with revivify to "mend the wounds" in the actual brain, I think it's important to do what you're suggesting and make the personality and skill damage, from the missing parts of the brain (too hard to define properly) unaffected by revivify. So there needs to be further (defined by DM) healing or repair, or even some creative, permanent changes (such as the sorcerer idea you suggested).
If anyone else has thoughts on this I would love to heard them. Thanks all.
This is up the your DM. I would allow death and revivification to cure any brain damage.
I might decide to make it a plot point and have some after effects. Maybe Ilithids are interested in him and want to complete the process. Maybe he can read their minds. Maybe they can send him messages.
Or maybe someone wants him to THINK that is going on.
Does the DM want a useless character that can be replaced by a new one because they are left unplayable after suffering severe brain damage?
Does the DM want a character that has some sort of ailment as a result of their experience? Do they want this to be a short term or a long term consequence? How significant does the DM want this to be?
Does the DM want a character that has had a terrible experience but through the healing ability of magic is able to be restored to full functioning?
--
Revivify: "This spell can't return to life a creature that has died of old age, nor can it restore any missing body parts."
However, it is clearly intended to restore mortal wounds but not ones with parts missing. A character with many organs chopped up could be revived, one without a heart would die as soon as they are revived since the spell would not replace the heart.
--
Briefly looking at some sources on Ceremorphosis, the illithid tadpole consumes the brain of the victim within a few hours. Usual approaches seem to involve rather drastic treatments of the head to kill the tadpole followed by resurrection or true resurrection with heal or other spells that could be used to restore missing parts. Based on what I could find, revivify would be a long shot since there doesn't appear to be any way to kill the tadpole without also leaving the host without a brain ... which isn't likely to work with revivify. A generous DM could rule that the brain is not missing, only transformed into the tadpole ... as a result, if they could kill the tadpole in place without removing it then revivify could work since the parts that composed the brain are still there even if they were somewhat transformed.
No matter what way you look at it, this will be a DM call and the likely outcome will depend on what the DM wants to achieve in this situation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Need some help with a ruling: (I'd love to find a Sage Advice ruling on Revivify and "restore missing body parts" but I can't find one)
Player has an illithid tadpole for over 24 hours. I'm ruling there is some permanent brain damage so far (e.g. cortex is gone, eliminated).
Question: Can the players just kill the person, "wound" enough of the brain material to be rid of the tadpole (which I will rule would have to be VERY extensive damage) and then REVIVIFY the person back to 100%, raised perfection?
Follow up: how much damaged brain qualifies for it to be a "missing body part"?
People get stuck on the interpretation of Revivify's wording: "nor can it restore any missing body parts".
My thoughts: the spirit of the 3rd level spell was not to allow people to come back to life if parts of their brain are missing and/or directly targeted with attacks that would leave the brain matter more or less mush.
Looking for a very literal, "sage advice" type answer if possible.
Thanks very much!
I'm not sure you are going to get a specific RAW or even sage advice answer to your question as it has a lot of "DM should adjudicate" stuff in it, but a few things from the text:
1) the process of Ceremorphosis takes a week, so your player is 1/7th through the process.
2) No textual mechanic is given for the process other than the tadpole is devouring the brain and changing the body.
3) it is possible for the process to be interrupted and halted (see one of the possible origins of an Aberrant Mind Sorcerer in Tasha's)
4) Revivify doesn't restore missing body parts, but it does repair damaged ones presumably, as it brings a creature back to life and restores one hitpoint (and the most common form of death for PC's is injury, so if the spell didn't heal the injury you'd be back at square one).
5) while not related to ceremorphosis, in Volos there is a process given for becoming a thrall of the mindflayer, which involves stripping the victims mind of its core personality, memories, and has a mechanical effect of first halving intelligence, then adding 1d6 at the end of the process. This process is reversed through 3 days of healing magic (heal, regenerate, and greater restoration applied once a day each) This is not related, but a possible similar mechanic to "crib" for a ruling
6) also unrelated, but possibly useful, is the Mind Flayer's extract brain ability, which deals 10d10 damage
So, and this is extrapolation and a suggestion, not a RAW ruling. If you as DM rule that the brain has not been fully devoured yet, and as DM you rule that the tadpole could be extracted forcibly, you could have the party effect surgery to remove it without killing them, with Revivify as a backup in case it goes awry. I would recommend a series of high DC medicine checks and an amount of time spent for "surgery" with the success (or failure) of the check determining how much damage the PC takes as part of the surgery. Treat it like death saves, If they succeed three times first, they deal 10d10 damage (extract the brain) to the player but extract the tadpole. If they fail three times first, they deal the damage, lose the time, and possibly destroy/damage the brain further. Either way, if the player dies, Revivify would work to bring them back to life if the brain hasn't been destroyed fully. Otherwise, they will need a better spell.
Now, once the tadpole is removed and the player healed, what is the end result? you could use the thrall rules in that the creatures intelligence is halved (or worse, if the check was failed at least once) until some amount of high level healing is applied (possible quest to find a healer, ingredients). You could force the creature to adopt a level or two of aberrant mind sorcerer. Or they could lose their memories or certain skills/proficiencies until they are healed. That part is more or less up to you.
I hope this helps!
Regarding how much of a brain can be removed until it is considered "missing" I'd say there are two ways to adjudicate. One would be what is missing is missing, so the PC might be alive after Revivify but comatose, or be without certain memories or abilities. The other would be to say its damaged, but not missing, until it is completely removed/destroyed, then (presumably) Revivify would restore the damage (including the missing pieces)
Thanks Icon, Great answer!
Even with revivify to "mend the wounds" in the actual brain, I think it's important to do what you're suggesting and make the personality and skill damage, from the missing parts of the brain (too hard to define properly) unaffected by revivify. So there needs to be further (defined by DM) healing or repair, or even some creative, permanent changes (such as the sorcerer idea you suggested).
If anyone else has thoughts on this I would love to heard them. Thanks all.
This is up the your DM. I would allow death and revivification to cure any brain damage.
I might decide to make it a plot point and have some after effects. Maybe Ilithids are interested in him and want to complete the process. Maybe he can read their minds. Maybe they can send him messages.
Or maybe someone wants him to THINK that is going on.
I think it depends on what the DMs goal is here.
Does the DM want a useless character that can be replaced by a new one because they are left unplayable after suffering severe brain damage?
Does the DM want a character that has some sort of ailment as a result of their experience? Do they want this to be a short term or a long term consequence? How significant does the DM want this to be?
Does the DM want a character that has had a terrible experience but through the healing ability of magic is able to be restored to full functioning?
--
Revivify: "This spell can't return to life a creature that has died of old age, nor can it restore any missing body parts."
However, it is clearly intended to restore mortal wounds but not ones with parts missing. A character with many organs chopped up could be revived, one without a heart would die as soon as they are revived since the spell would not replace the heart.
--
Briefly looking at some sources on Ceremorphosis, the illithid tadpole consumes the brain of the victim within a few hours. Usual approaches seem to involve rather drastic treatments of the head to kill the tadpole followed by resurrection or true resurrection with heal or other spells that could be used to restore missing parts. Based on what I could find, revivify would be a long shot since there doesn't appear to be any way to kill the tadpole without also leaving the host without a brain ... which isn't likely to work with revivify. A generous DM could rule that the brain is not missing, only transformed into the tadpole ... as a result, if they could kill the tadpole in place without removing it then revivify could work since the parts that composed the brain are still there even if they were somewhat transformed.
No matter what way you look at it, this will be a DM call and the likely outcome will depend on what the DM wants to achieve in this situation.