What sort of Greater Undead was the Dragon?

[Robert Paulson]

I looked around the net for rules, etc., but didn't find anything very satisfying. It would have to be some kind of creature that can communicate, negotiate and remember its part life. Vampire maybe? What do YOU think?

[Ancalagon]

"d20" and "rules" in google gives:

http://www.d20srd.org/

which then gives:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/createGreaterUndead.htm

I think the key-phrase here is "intelligent", since normal undead are rather... mindless...

[Robert Paulson]

"d20" and "rules" in google gives:

http://www.d20srd.org/

which then gives:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/createGreaterUndead.htm

I think the key-phrase here is "intelligent", since normal undead are rather... mindless...

I read that before posting. I also read the pages about the various typed of greater undead. I don't need a lesson in how to use Google, but thanks.

[V'icternus]

I think it was a Plotian. A Greater Undead used to further the plot of any story.

Joke asside, I have absolutely no idea. Monsters aren't my speciality... I beleive in a more "meet them, carve them into dinner" approach. Discovering the details of their design isn't exactly needed for the wandering death machine. (Nickname for my one of my old parties, because the real name for our group was dumb.)

[Dracomortis]

Rules-wise, I don't think you'll find anything that's a perfect match, since none of the four creatures on the create greater undead list seem to describe an animated dragon head. Given the level of power that V currently has and the fact that only the head was used to create the undead, however, I'd probably have to guess that it's some sort of demilich.

[MickJay]

My guess is, he simply put some negative energy to bring back the soul to the corpse (or what's left of it) and called it a day; he obviously didn't want (or need) to create any type of "working" undead.

[Paramour Pink]

I'd guess it was a Speak With Dead spell but...that doesn't work. Anyway, I think Rich said that he is going to be mixing and matching things between editions and he homebrews the rest, so it's doubtful you'll find an answer.

[Errata]

My bet is dracolich. The dracolich is a pretty well established monster type that has appeared in every version of d&d so far.

As for the mechanics of it, I'll assume some sort of epic necromantic feat was involved.

[Claudius Maximus]

Rich was clearly not following the normal rules for Create Greater Undead. First of all, I seriously doubt that V spent an hour casting that spell. His family would have said something in that time, at the least. Furthermore, the undead dragon head is definitely not a devourer, and it's not incorporeal, so I agree that it was a Plotian. This was just another one of those times where Rich ignored the rules for the sake of the story.

[hamishspence]

Unapproachable East updates a generic 2nd ed monster to 3.0 (and is updated to 3.5 in errata) : the Ju-ju Zombie. Any dead corporeal creature can be turned into a Ju-ju zombie with the Create Undead spell, cast by 16th level or higher caster.

(I figure Create Greater Undead will create lesser ones as well, if used)

Ju-ju Zombies get -4 to INT, but are otherwise not much changed from the living version.

BoVD's Corpse Creature template might work- it says "create undead or create greater undead" can be used.

[Mr. Pin]

Yeah, sounds like a Ju-ju zombie to me, as well.

[hamishspence]

I put that one as less likely than Corpse creature (since, despite originally being a generic D&D monster, its in a Forgotten Realms book)

Corpse creature is significantly more plausible since BoVD monster (Eye of Fear and Flame) has already been seen in the strip.

Still, point is- several "intelligent zombie" type monsters exist, which can be made with Create Greater Undead.

[Undead Prince]

Ju-Ju Zombie.

The comic already referred to "weird undead from Oriental Adventures" (i.e. Unapproachable East, which also has another undead that keeps class levels - the Dread Warrior).

However, normally Ju-Ju Zombies are beings of pure evil and spite. Reanimated as one, ABD would not care about its child, husband, or other relatives. If anything, it would be glad to assist in killing living creatures (that's what Ju-Ju Zombies do if left to their own devices). Also, JJZ can't speak, so V would have to slap a Tongues on the head. But, that's artistic license for you. Otherwise, the Ju-Ju Zombie is the closest.

[hamishspence]

Main reasons I placed Corpse Creature as slightly more probable-

its in BoVD, which has already contributed 1 monster to the strip,
it has full intelligence, compared to -4 for Ju-Ju zombie,
Unapproachable East is a Faerun book. (not sure if Oriental Adventures has ju-ju zombies)

[Ragn Charran]

My issue with this is it seems to violate the "spirit must be willing to return" clause of the resurrection spell family. To my understanding most created undead simply have an evil essence that replaces the soul. What V did here is clearly pull ABD's soul out of the afterlife and force it back into her body just to **** with her. Yes, it's not resurrection, it's lichification (for lack of a better word), but it still violates the entire intention of the willingness clause on resurrection spells - to prevent gross abuse of the power to capture foes who, by dying, have escaped you.

She clearly did not agree to be brought back, because she was surprised to be back. She did not answer a call, she was pulled back without her input or knowledge.

Granted, it may work in a similar fashion to Soul Bind, but the wording she had about having already been to her outer plane suggests she was already gone, and should be out of the reach.

Even for epic magic, this seems nasty - it's directly flipping off a very hard and fast rule set by the gods themselves. And V's using it solely to torture ABD makes it even nastier.

Bit of a stretch for me. And an unnecessary stretch in a strip already dealing with another massive and controversial one (the familicide spell itself).

[JJ48]

My issue with this is it seems to violate the "spirit must be willing to return" clause of the resurrection spell family. To my understanding most created undead simply have an evil essence that replaces the soul. What V did here is clearly pull ABD's soul out of the afterlife and force it back into her body just to **** with her. Yes, it's not resurrection, it's lichification (for lack of a better word), but it still violates the entire intention of the willingness clause on resurrection spells - to prevent gross abuse of the power to capture foes who, by dying, have escaped you.

She clearly did not agree to be brought back, because she was surprised to be back. She did not answer a call, she was pulled back without her input or knowledge.

Granted, it may work in a similar fashion to Soul Bind, but the wording she had about having already been to her outer plane suggests she was already gone, and should be out of the reach.

Even for epic magic, this seems nasty - it's directly flipping off a very hard and fast rule set by the gods themselves. And V's using it solely to torture ABD makes it even nastier.

Bit of a stretch for me. And an unnecessary stretch in a strip already dealing with another massive and controversial one (the familicide spell itself).

I think that is probably part of the point of the strip, is to point out just far beyond normal limits V's abilities have become.

That being said, given that V's abilities are now beyond probably every single arcane spellcaster who ever lived, perhaps this is an entirely new type of undead. I mean, every type of undead has to have a "first victim", right?

[whitemane]

My issue with this is it seems to violate the "spirit must be willing to return" clause of the resurrection spell family. To my understanding most created undead simply have an evil essence that replaces the soul. What V did here is clearly pull ABD's soul out of the afterlife and force it back into her body just to **** with her. Yes, it's not resurrection, it's lichification (for lack of a better word), but it still violates the entire intention of the willingness clause on resurrection spells - to prevent gross abuse of the power to capture foes who, by dying, have escaped you.


That assumes that this was a Resurrection spell. Necromancy spells (particularly, ones that create undead) are in a whole other league from Resurrection spells. Resurrection spells are designed to bring a creature back from the dead which implies an explicit connection to the positive and negative material planes in the casting with a little bit of spiritual magic thrown in.

Necromancy spells, on the other hand, draw directly from the negative plane and the energy of the plane has a direct connection to the remains of the undead which gives them a semblance of life, but not actual life. Because of the forceful nature that the corpse is animated, Necromancy spells don't require consent to be animated. (If they did, would ANYONE allow themselves to have their bodies reanimated as a zombie?)

Just throwing in my 2 copper pieces.

[JJ48]

Does creating an undead, especially lesser ones such as zombies, really require the soul to come back? I thought there was just some sort of energy infused into the body, that wasn't necessarily the person's soul, or indeed, any real soul at all.

For example:
In "Start of Darkness", Xykon kills the druid lady, and traps her soul in some sort of gem. He is still, however, able to raise her body as an undead, so clearly, it is not her soul that is powering it.

EDIT: Clearly in the case of V and the dragon, this isn't the case, as it is the dragon's actual soul that has returned. I'm just saying in general...

[whitemane]

Does creating an undead, especially lesser ones such as zombies, really require the soul to come back? I thought there was just some sort of energy infused into the body, that wasn't necessarily the person's soul, or indeed, any real soul at all.

For example:
In "Start of Darkness", Xykon kills the druid lady, and traps her soul in some sort of gem. He is still, however, able to raise her body as an undead, so clearly, it is not her soul that is powering it.

EDIT: Clearly in the case of V and the dragon, this isn't the case, as it is the dragon's actual soul that has returned. I'm just saying in general...

Guess I should've clarified my position in my ramblings by adding the phrase "whether or not the soul is re-integrated with the body" at the end of my sentence.... Sooooo.....

"Because of the forceful nature that the corpse is animated, Necromancy spells don't require consent to be animated whether or not the soul is re-integrated with the body."

[JJ48]

Oh, ok. Thanks for clarifying. My only experiences with D&D are through Neverwinter Nights and Order of the Stick, which really aren't conducive to fully understanding mechanics such as how to make undead.

[David Argall]

Pretty definitely a Plotian all right. There is no undead that much like it, and the spell should not create anything of the sort. Nor is the presence of the dragon soul all that proper either.

[hamishspence]

Corpse Creature is fairly close- can be created with Create Greater Undead, retains all powers of living creature, no change to intelligence, is in a source used already in the strip (BoVD). The creature being just a head is the only odd thing.

[multilis]

The dragon had *just* died a few seconds before, and only a head was animated... so homebrew ruling likely given this unique situation.

May be tied to rules of Familicide, whatever they are (possible normally the main target of spell has a good save roll, and also helps in save roll for the rest, but a loophole was found by killing and rush animating target to wreck the save)

[Toil3T]

If the necromancer V is channeling created one epic level spell, I see no problem with this "ressurrection" being another such spell.

And I'm aware it isn't a ressurrection, the word just fits. I don't want to get caught up in definitions and correct terminology right now.

/2CP

[factotum]

She clearly did not agree to be brought back, because she was surprised to be back. She did not answer a call, she was pulled back without her input or knowledge.


This is one of those areas where the rules are a bit contradictory, though. If creating a Zombie from a corpse does not affect the original soul at all, why are you then unable to chop its finger off and use Resurrection to restore the original creature without first killing the zombie? There has to be SOME sort of afterlife shenanigans going on there!