The OotS Thread III

[Irbis]

That would suggest the ashes of Malack are shit out of luck.

Limited Wish? Or, failing that, Miracle/Wish?

Or maybe Regenerate version made for Undead would work?

[Grumman]

That would suggest the ashes of Malack are shit out of luck.

Limited Wish? Or, failing that, Miracle/Wish?

Or maybe Regenerate version made for Undead would work?

Miracle or Wish would probably work, but Undead Regenerate wouldn't, because Malack isn't undead any more, just dead. Even if not for that, Regenerate is meant to repair damage less severe than "reduced to a fine powder".

[xthetenth]

As for bringing back Malack, he can't be restored as a vampire; any attempt to resurrect him would restore his living self.

That could only improve his build, so...

[Vaporous]

Even if a means of bringing Malack back theoretically exists, I doubt Burlew is gonig to use it. Malack is gone. It only remains to see how Tarquin reacts and adapts.

[Lord of the Abyss]

About the only reason I could see Burlew bringing Malack back is for him be raised and return as that 200-years-dead shaman, without any memory of his time as a vampire, with Durkon as a witness. This would establish that the resurrection of the mortal is the annihilation of the vampire and give VampDurkon a strong reason to resist the "kill & raise Vampire Durkon to get Old Durkon back" plan.

[Rogue 9]

As for bringing back Malack, he can't be restored as a vampire; any attempt to resurrect him would restore his living self.

That could only improve his build, so...

Not really. Level adjustment is only a concern for player characters; as far as Malack the NPC is concerned, he'd still be a cleric of the same level and spellcasting power he was before, only suddenly out a whole bunch of really sweet stat adjustments. The reason vampire casters are nonviable for PCs is because the level adjustment is so high that their spellcasting lags way behind their adjusted character level to the point where it becomes irrelevant, which is a nonfactor for him.

[Ted C]

Most likely very useful, or he wouldn't have been kept around for it, if that's your estimation of Tarquin's calculus.

Tarquin and Malack were genuine friends. I can't imagine that Tarquin will appreciate what Nale did.

As for bringing back Malack, he can't be restored as a vampire; any attempt to resurrect him would restore his living self.

Bringing Malack back would presumably require some combination of True Resurrection and Create Greater Undead, presumably with a ritual suicide in between.

[Rogue 9]

Most likely very useful, or he wouldn't have been kept around for it, if that's your estimation of Tarquin's calculus.

Tarquin and Malack were genuine friends. I can't imagine that Tarquin will appreciate what Nale did.

Which is what I said in the very next line.

[Grumman]

Bringing Malack back would presumably require some combination of True Resurrection and Create Greater Undead, presumably with a ritual suicide in between.

Create Greater Undead wouldn't work, but you don't need it. Just True Res Malack, then have Durkon drain him.

(not that this is going to happen - the writer says he's treating True Resurrection as unavailable. If the lower level spells can't raise you, you're dead for good.

[Spekio]

Also, didn't Malak state a couple of strips prior that if he was resssurected he wouldn't be Malak per se, but who he was before turning into Malak?

[Ralin]

Also, didn't Malak state a couple of strips prior that if he was resssurected he wouldn't be Malak per se, but who he was before turning into Malak?

Yes, but that doesn't mean he was speaking literally. Like a reverse version of someone insisting that their newly evil vampire friend "Isn't him anymore"

[Lord of the Abyss]

Also, didn't Malak state a couple of strips prior that if he was resssurected he wouldn't be Malak per se, but who he was before turning into Malak?

Yes, but that doesn't mean he was speaking literally. Like a reverse version of someone insisting that their newly evil vampire friend "Isn't him anymore"

On the other hand as I said, it's quite possible that Malack was speaking literally, and what would be resurrected is a 200 year dead shaman with no vampire memories. And this is the comic in question.

[Ralin]

It's possible, sure, but there's nothing in the rules or D&D fluff that I can think of backing up the idea that a resurrected vampire will revert to who he was when he died and lose all of his memories of being undead, and it doesn't seem to flow naturally from the concept, at least not to me. So I'm believe that Malack wasn't speaking literally when he said that until I see something to the contrary.

Moot point since it's probably not going to come up. Though I wonder if Malack would actually know either way. It can't be a situation that comes up that often.

[Irbis]

Moot point since it's probably not going to come up. Though I wonder if Malack would actually know either way. It can't be a situation that comes up that often.

Maybe he tried to Resurrect "children" killed by Nale?

[Ralin]

Maybe he tried to Resurrect "children" killed by Nale?

Could be. Wasn't there something about clerics of Nerull having prohibitions about that sort of thing, though?

[Spekio]

Could just be the rules of the setting. It would be a great way to create drama, when Durkula doesn't want to revert back to Durkon.

[Crazedwraith]

It makes sense to me that a ressurected Vampire wouldn't have the memories of things it does as a vampire. After all OotS people have souls that go to afterlives when they die. And get ferried back to the body when they're raised. So their consciousness literally wasn't there for anything the vampire did.

Also in the case Of Malack he was a vampire so long, his original soul/consciousness must have gone so far up the afterlife-enlightment-mountain thing that it probably wouldn't come back if asked to by a Resurrection. It'd be too caught up in ineffable better things.

[AniThyng]

It would be rather pointless to call it character development for Durkon if that was not Durkon but a thing that looks like Durkon. Unless we are going to also spend another dozen strips following the wacky adventures of DurkonSoul and Thor.

[Grumman]

It makes sense to me that a ressurected Vampire wouldn't have the memories of things it does as a vampire. After all OotS people have souls that go to afterlives when they die. And get ferried back to the body when they're raised. So their consciousness literally wasn't there for anything the vampire did.

No. If this was true, True Resurrection would work on someone whose body had been raised as an undead creature. It doesn't. Therefore, raising someone as any kind of undead must affect their soul in some manner, because there's literally nothing you can do to the body to stop True Resurrection working.

[Simon_Jester]

It would be rather pointless to call it character development for Durkon if that was not Durkon but a thing that looks like Durkon. Unless we are going to also spend another dozen strips following the wacky adventures of DurkonSoul and Thor.

My impression is that the actual... soul of the dwarf can go on to the next life while at the same time, there is a mental continuity between the vampire and the original living dwarf.

The vampire's consciousness represents a sort of... shadow of the living person, formed in its image but distorted and altered by the process of creating an undead.

So Durkon's soul can be off climbing the big Lawful Good Mountain, while Durkula is wandering around the desert, and these are not mutually exclusive possibilities, any more than it was somehow impossible for Roy's soul to be running around at the same time that Bone Golem Roy was rampaging in Greysky City.

[Mr Bean]

So Durkon's soul can be off climbing the big Lawful Good Mountain, while Durkula is wandering around the desert, and these are not mutually exclusive possibilities, any more than it was somehow impossible for Roy's soul to be running around at the same time that Bone Golem Roy was rampaging in Greysky City.

In some verisons of D&D Bone golem are elemental's bound into forms by magic and driven mad in the process. In others the negative energy plane provides the motion to the motionless.

Point being unintelligent undead are roughly the same thing as an animated chair, it's magic making that thing move not soul power.

[Ted C]

Also, didn't Malak state a couple of strips prior that if he was resssurected he wouldn't be Malak per se, but who he was before turning into Malak?

Yes, but that doesn't mean he was speaking literally. Like a reverse version of someone insisting that their newly evil vampire friend "Isn't him anymore"

On the other hand as I said, it's quite possible that Malack was speaking literally, and what would be resurrected is a 200 year dead shaman with no vampire memories. And this is the comic in question.

Presumably, if he were resurrected, he would have his original alignment. Becoming a vampire does change your personality, as demonstrated by the fact that it will turn someone evil, regardless of their original alignment (we might guess that someone already evil becomes more evil).

[Ted C]

It would be rather pointless to call it character development for Durkon if that was not Durkon but a thing that looks like Durkon. Unless we are going to also spend another dozen strips following the wacky adventures of DurkonSoul and Thor.

My impression is that the actual... soul of the dwarf can go on to the next life while at the same time, there is a mental continuity between the vampire and the original living dwarf.

The vampire's consciousness represents a sort of... shadow of the living person, formed in its image but distorted and altered by the process of creating an undead.

So Durkon's soul can be off climbing the big Lawful Good Mountain, while Durkula is wandering around the desert, and these are not mutually exclusive possibilities, any more than it was somehow impossible for Roy's soul to be running around at the same time that Bone Golem Roy was rampaging in Greysky City.

I've always thought that the soul of a corporeal undead was basically trapped in the body, unable to reach its afterlife until the undead form was destroyed.

[Napoleon the Clown]

The way Xykon talks about the various ways to attain immortality suggests you're right. Why become an undead if it won't save you from going to whichever hell you're deemed to deserve? Or delay it, at least.


As far as what happens to someone who's already evil, I would think that it just adds predatory instincts and a desire for blood. If they weren't there already.

[Grumman]

Point being unintelligent undead are roughly the same thing as an animated chair, it's magic making that thing move not soul power.

Again, this is incorrect. Even an unintelligent undead has some form of binding effect upon the person's soul, that prevents them being raised even by True Resurrection.