Why doesn't Malack just raise his kids?

[Zerg Cookie]

I know it was probably discussed to death before, but I just wondered why doesn't he.
He is obviously a powerful enough cleric to do that and money isn't a problem since he's running a freaking empire.
Maybe they don't wanna come back or something?

[Dr.Epic]

Or there are no remnants and he's not that powerful of a cleric.

[Zerg Cookie]

And neither is any cleric in his entire region, which is most of the western continent?
He can just pay somebody to do that. He effectively has infinite gold

[Adrayll]

My guess is it's the same problem that was had with Roy's little brother. Little children would "wake up" in a nice place designed to make them happy, and subsequently wouldn't comprehend a reason to answer to the spell.

[Gift Jeraff]

And neither is any cleric in his entire region, which is most of the western continent?
Possibly. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0579.html)

Or maybe it's against his religion to "disrespect" death?

[theNater]

And neither is any cleric in his entire region, which is most of the western continent?
It's not uncommon for high priests to be the highest level priest in their own regions.

As for the main question, there are some factors that no cleric can overcome, even with True Resurrection. One is the time limit; it's possible that Malack's children have simply been dead for too long. Another is the old age restriction. While it's not likely that Malack's children would die of old age before him, Malack is not your typical lizardfolk. We know he has albinism and requires a special diet, he may have an unusually long lifespan as well.

But I would like to ask one question: are we sure Malack's children are dead? If all that's happened is that they've grown up and moved away, Malack could still want more children. The ability to raise the dead would not help in such a situation.

[Herald Alberich]

Depending on how young the kids were (and considering Malack's own frail health, which may be linked to his albinism and therefore genetic in origin), perhaps they only had 1-2 points of Constitution each, which would prevent raising (since they probably also didn't have more than one level).

This also doesn't stop True Resurrection, so Malack probably isn't 17th level yet.

Edit:

It's not uncommon for high priests to be the highest level priest in their own regions.

As for the main question, there are some factors that no cleric can overcome, even with True Resurrection. One is the time limit; it's possible that Malack's children have simply been dead for too long. Another is the old age restriction. While it's not likely that Malack's children would die of old age before him, Malack is not your typical lizardfolk. We know he has albinism and requires a special diet, he may have an unusually long lifespan as well.

But I would like to ask one question: are we sure Malack's children are dead? If all that's happened is that they've grown up and moved away, Malack could still want more children. The ability to raise the dead would not help in such a situation.

True Res has a limit of 10 years. Nale killed "three of" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0724.html) Malack's children; unless he did it at age 13 (possible, I guess), that's not the problem.

The wording suggests that there were other children; no word on what happened to them.

Edit again:

Or maybe it's against his religion to "disrespect" death?

I like this idea more, actually. He worships a god of death (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0737.html), who might not be too keen on giving his priests the ability to yank souls from his clutches.

[factotum]

I'm inclined to think it's against Malack's religion to do such a thing--he worships a god of Death, after all, and taking back someone who has already gone to his God is probably a no-no for him.

[EDIT] True Resurrection allows you to restore someone who's been dead for 10 years *per caster level*, and since you need to be at least level 17 to cast the spell in the first place, his kids would have to have been dead for 170 years to make it impossible to bring them back that way. I don't think Nale is quite that old, somehow... :smallwink:

[Herald Alberich]

Oh. Well, it's late on this part of the planet, I was skimming. :smallredface:

[The Pilgrim]

I've been beaten to it, but my guess is also that a worshipper of Death is likely to be reluctant to do such a thing, treating death like if it were a revolving door.

Funny thing is that if this speculation is true, then he will not be resurrecting Tarquin if he dies, like Haley fears. Durkon's friendship with Malak might turn out to be crucial for the OOTS to figure out this.

[Axinian]

I don't think Nale is quite that old, somehow... :smallwink:

YOU FOOL! Now you've opened the floodgates of ridiculous speculatory threads proclaiming how Elan and Nale and Tarquin are all actually super-long-lived! I can see the theories now... *shiver*

[Lawliet29]

I don't think that he would even try to raise anyone. The Piligrim said that sometime before - as the servant of Nergal, he won't try to take someone from his god's domain.

[Morquard]

Actually I think Malack doesn't have problems with raising the dead if it suits him.
Just because he worships the god of death doesn't mean he's not allowed to raise them. Actually it might even make it easier.

Remember gods are imortal. A few years doesn't really matter to them. All humans eventually die anyway. If releasing a couple souls for a bit makes a priest happy and that way he gets more worshippers, thats a good deal.

[JoseB]

Actually I think Malack doesn't have problems with raising the dead if it suits him.
Just because he worships the god of death doesn't mean he's not allowed to raise them. Actually it might even make it easier.

Remember gods are imortal. A few years doesn't really matter to them. All humans eventually die anyway. If releasing a couple souls for a bit makes a priest happy and that way he gets more worshippers, thats a good deal.

That would depend on how stuck-up and rigid the god would be, really. I have the feeling that a Death deity would not be exactly the happy-go-lucky, easy-going type... Possibly heavy on protocol and ritual, and definitely not the kind of deity that would lightly take any show of "disrespect".

And snatching a soul from the hands (paws, whatever) of the Death god after the soul in question has been taken doesn't sound like a very respectful thing to do to a (very probably) persnickety god.

[Ancalagon]

We also do not know how the kids died (what Nale did intently or not-intendly).

They might have been badly injured, suffocated or othervise died in a very bad way. Knowing Nale, I'd not put it behind him to have the kids kidnapped and locked up for a long time before their death. He might even have done nasty things to them (torture) or sent their pieces (cut off the live body) to Malak and Tarquin just "to make a point".
I do not think I should go on - but it might be the kids, we do not know how old and "conscious" they were are heavily traumatized by their death or the circumstances around it.

In such a case, Malak would do the only reasonable thing: Leave the kids in the peaceful afterlife where they belong instead of getting them back in this life due to his OWN wishes.
Sometimes, it might be best to leave dead things dead - simply because life left too deep scars.

[theNater]

Nale killed "three of" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0724.html) Malack's children; unless he did it at age 13 (possible, I guess), that's not the problem.
I had forgotten that. Thanks for the reminder.

[King of Nowhere]

Raising deads is a useful tool that the cclerics of death should not be denied.
However, it is possible that nergal accepts the raising of powerful mortals (that could influence the world on his behalf) but will not like the raising of children just for sentimental value.

Anyway, I prefer the idea that they just don't want to be raised, like Roy's brother

[Swordpriest]

What can I say? Some people just don't know how to raise their children right. :smallwink:

[Gift Jeraff]

Funny thing is that if this speculation is true, then he will not be resurrecting Tarquin if he dies, like Haley fears. Durkon's friendship with Malak might turn out to be crucial for the OOTS to figure out this.
Unless the problem is that resurrection only prevents worshipers from spending eternity with Nergal.

[ObadiahtheSlim]

The kids coulda been first level commoners with a low consitution score. A resurection would lower that score. He may leave them dead to preserve their dignity rather than having them live as a very frail commoner.

[j0ecool]

When I saw this thread I thought it meant... Well, the other kind of raise.

Anyway, where does it say he didn't raise them? If Nale killed his children he's liable to be quite irate about that even if he could "just bring them back". Even if they were of age and had class levels, they didn't stop being Malack's babies.

[StyxMotors]

What can I say? Some people just don't know how to raise their children right. :smallwink:

Ouch, that's good.

[Herald Alberich]

When I saw this thread I thought it meant... Well, the other kind of raise.

Anyway, where does it say he didn't raise them? If Nale killed his children he's liable to be quite irate about that even if he could "just bring them back". Even if they were of age and had class levels, they didn't stop being Malack's babies.

Malack's lament (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0764.html) seems to indicate he never did have the chance to watch his kids grow up.

[ShadeSpark]

Since this is Nale we're talking about, I think its entirely possible that he went out of his way to make certain that Malack's kids could not be raised. The entire body is need for a ressurection spell, right? So Nale could have killed them in such a way that there were no bodies left.
On another note, the idea that raising people goes against Malack's religion makes sense as well.

[factotum]

The entire body is need for a ressurection spell, right? So Nale could have killed them in such a way that there were no bodies left.


No, it isn't. You need a complete body for Raise Dead, but Resurrection only requires that some portion of the body remains--even the dust left behind by a Disintegrate spell is sufficient. True Resurrection doesn't even need that much--so long as the caster can unambiguously identify who they want raised, then that spell will raise them!

[Qwertystop]

Since this is Nale we're talking about, I think its entirely possible that he went out of his way to make certain that Malack's kids could not be raised. The entire body is need for a ressurection spell, right? So Nale could have killed them in such a way that there were no bodies left.
On another note, the idea that raising people goes against Malack's religion makes sense as well.

Actually, Resurrection only requires a small portion of the body, and the portion in question must have still been attached at death. Raise Dead is the one that requires an intact body, though it can still repair damaged parts of the body as long as they are not missing.

[Ron Miel]

Maybe his "children" were eggs that Nale smashed. Can you raise eggs?

Or maybe his mate was an outsider, and their children can't be raised. His mate also seems to be dead, and not raised based on #764.

[ShadeSpark]

No, it isn't. You need a complete body for Raise Dead, but Resurrection only requires that some portion of the body remains--even the dust left behind by a Disintegrate spell is sufficient. True Resurrection doesn't even need that much--so long as the caster can unambiguously identify who they want raised, then that spell will raise them!

Seriously? Huh. In that case my old DM owes me one lv. 13 Ranger.

Anyway, since that theory is out the window, I think that raising the dead goes against Malack's religion and/or his kids don't want to come back are the most logical explanations.

[grimbold]

My guess is it's the same problem that was had with Roy's little brother. Little children would "wake up" in a nice place designed to make them happy, and subsequently wouldn't comprehend a reason to answer to the spell.

i agree
this would make the most sense of all the explanations i have seen

[The Pilgrim]

My guess is it's the same problem that was had with Roy's little brother. Little children would "wake up" in a nice place designed to make them happy, and subsequently wouldn't comprehend a reason to answer to the spell.

While a plausible and rational theory, it musn't be forgotten that not all places in the afterlife are designed to make it's inhabitants happy. Malak's kids may not have shared Eric's* alignment.



*That's how Roy's little brother was called, wasn't it?

[Red XIV]

I've been beaten to it, but my guess is also that a worshipper of Death is likely to be reluctant to do such a thing, treating death like if it were a revolving door.

Funny thing is that if this speculation is true, then he will not be resurrecting Tarquin if he dies, like Haley fears. Durkon's friendship with Malak might turn out to be crucial for the OOTS to figure out this.
That's an interesting point.
I guess it depends on whether Malack's (hypothetical) religious objection to Resurrection spells would apply only to worshipers of the Western Gods (since they're the ones who Nergal has jurisdiction over).


Maybe his "children" were eggs that Nale smashed. Can you raise eggs?

Or maybe his mate was an outsider, and their children can't be raised. His mate also seems to be dead, and not raised based on #764.
The hybrid children of an Outsider and a native of the material plane get the Native subtype, which means they can be raised. I'm guessing eggs can't be raised, though.

[Toofey]

Can't raise the undead.

[Qwertystop]

Can't raise the undead.

Well, that's the loony-theory-for-the-thread out of the way. :smallamused: :smalltongue:

[Velarias]

Can't raise the undead.

Actually I was of the same mind. Couldn't he be some sort of undead? His outer appearance, his "special diet". Seems a little on the dead side
to me.:smallcool:

[snikrept]

Along the same lines as above: what happens when Malack discovers that Roy is a person who has managed to cheat Death if doing so is in fact a great sacrilege to him?

[factotum]

what happens when Malack discovers that Roy is a person who has managed to cheat Death

Why "when"? There's absolutely no reason Malack should ever find that out. IF he finds out, and he does have a religious antipathy to raising the dead, it might sour his friendship with Durkon; I suspect any souring of that particular relationship is more likely to happen from the Durkon side, though.

[Lord Vukodlak]

The complete divine book makes the case that the majority of people accept they are dead and have no desire to come back. Only those with great strength of will or strong unfinished business wish to return to life.

[Prowl]

Why doesn't Malack just raise his kids?

It's harder than ever to raise a kid these days.

[hoff]

Maybe he did raise them, but in both cases I would still be pretty pissed off at Nale.

[Ancalagon]

Along the same lines as above: what happens when Malack discovers that Roy is a person who has managed to cheat Death if doing so is in fact a great sacrilege to him?

Nothing happens.

There are dozens of gods in the OOTSverse - and most of them have no big problem with raising dead. Malack is a smart guy and educated about religion. He knows stuff like that happens, even if he or his god do not agree.
Learning about someone having been raised surely will be no shock he never thought about before that has to make him spring into some action of some sort.

He might comment what he thinks about it, that he would not have done it, why it should not be done, but in the end, nothing of consequence willl come from it.

[allenw]

Actually I was of the same mind. Couldn't he be some sort of undead? His outer appearance, his "special diet". Seems a little on the dead side
to me.:smallcool:

Malack may or may not be undead (a matter which has been heavily debated), but I agree that his "children" could easily have been so (he is a high-level cleric of a death god, after all, and some death gods *like* undead).

[Sir_Chivalry]

I know it was probably discussed to death before, but I just wondered why doesn't he.
He is obviously a powerful enough cleric to do that and money isn't a problem since he's running a freaking empire.
Maybe they don't wanna come back or something?

If the subject is 1st level, they take Con damage to come back, so he'd be torturing them back to life.

[Querzis]

People really gotta stop thinking resurection is so easy. Firstly, only people with important unfinished business in the mortal realms actually wanna come back. Roy and most adventurers do since you usually die in a fight before you finished your quest to save the world. But normal people? You can waste a dozen resurection spells on them, they wont come back. Especially children, no children will actually accept a resurection spell (then again, we dont know how old Malack childrens were). Anyway, point is nobody will accept a resurection spell just to be reunited with their loved one. They'll just wait till their loved one join them in the afterlife instead!

Secondly, if they were really children, then they were level 1. Which basically means that, if they rolled poorly on their con score (and if they were anything like Malack, thats quite likely), you could kill them by bringing them back to life. And even if their con score wasnt that bad, as Kish said, you'd still be basically torturing them by bringing them back.

Thirdly, Nale could have easely just hidden their remains. Its a desert, its not that hard to do. I really doubt Malack can cast True Resurection and Haley wasnt sure there was even a cleric in the entire world who could cast true resurection (except maybe Redcloak).

Fourthly, yeah, priest of the god of Death. So all in all, Malack got lots of good reason why he woudnt wanna rez his children and even if he did, I REALLY dont think it would work.

[Moogleking]

YOU FOOL! Now you've opened the floodgates of ridiculous speculatory threads proclaiming how Elan and Nale and Tarquin are all actually super-long-lived! I can see the theories now... *shiver*

Maybe Nale is an Elan :smalltongue:?

[Dirhyn]

Because he is a vampire ( pale skin, special diet). And his children are vampire he embraced, duh.

[Doxkid]

I see a few possibilties:
1) It would be a moot effort.

Bringing them back would leave them frail, sickly and shamefully easy targets for any of the many enemies he has collected.

Remember: He is a medium/high level adverturer who happens to serve a powerful empire. Killing him, or eliminating him in another way would do some serious damage; he's more than worth his weight in melees/fighters of his level whether he is level 10 or level 29 and certainly worth more than legions of low level soldiers. Removing him from ANY of the empires he serves would be like destroying half the continent's resources and armies in one go.

If Nale could kill them, what happens when they are just captured, tortured and used as bargaining chips?

2) He doesnt want to.

His children are happy in whatever afterlife they went to and he can visit them any time he wants. Even if he could convince them to come back, he knows they really are better off wherever they are; he doesnt like that fact, but he knows it.

3) His god would not allow it.

4) Trap the soul.

Trap the soul seems pretty likely, to be honest. Scroll the spell, ward the gem and then remove it from play. If he couldnt sell it, have it eaten or just plain toss it into the positive energy plane, he could still have it disappear because just about every book has SOMETHING that dooes so.