What is meant by skeleton?

[Glarx]

Hey there, Playgrounders!

Quick question. Under the zombie template, the language indicates that any corporal creature with a skeleton may be raised as a zombie. My question is, does that mean endoskeleton necessarily? Or can an exoskeleton count for this purpose?

While my feeling is that it meant endoskeletal systems only, I was recently confronted with the notion of zombie spiders. I'm unsure whether, by RAW, zombie spiders are allowed.

Thanks in advance!
Glarx

[Coidzor]

I believe the general agreement last time this came up was that they meant endoskeletons, but zombie spiders and crabs are too awesome not to have in our games.

Applying the skeleton template to them was much more controversial, though.

[Randomocity132]

"Zombie" is an acquired template that can be added to any corporeal creature (other than an undead) that has a skeletal system (referred to hereafter as the base creature).

Exoskeleton counts as a skeletal system.

[Ravens_cry]

"Zombie" is an acquired template that can be added to any corporeal creature (other than an undead) that has a skeletal system (referred to hereafter as the base creature).
Exoskeleton counts as a skeletal system.
That quote doesn't prove that. Since the usual word people have when talking about an endoskeleton is skeleton, and the word 'skeleton' is not a defined term, it is very ambiguous.
I'd allow it, but the RAW is super iffy.

[nyjastul69]

That quote doesn't prove that. Since the usual word people have when talking about an endoskeleton is skeleton, and the word 'skeleton' is not a defined term, it is very ambiguous.
I'd allow it, but the RAW is super iffy.

All of the words used to play D&D are defined. Some are game terms that have different denotations than common dictionary definitions of those same terms. In the absense of a game specific definition all definitions default to dictionary definitions. Both endoskeletons and exoskeletons are skeletal systems. There is no RAW reason not to allow for a zombie spider.

[Ravens_cry]

All of the words used to play D&D are defined. Some are game terms that have different denotations than common dictionary definitions of those same terms. In the absense of a game specific definition all definitions default to dictionary definitions. Both endoskeletons and exoskeletons are skeletal systems. There is no RAW reason not to allow for a zombie spider.
By 'defined', I mean it is in the glossary. And one definition of skeleton refers only to endoskeletons, being the 'default' skeleton to osteocentric beings such as ourselves. If cockroaches invented D&D, it would probably be otherwise.

[nyjastul69]

By 'defined', I mean it is in the glossary. And one definition of skeleton refers only to endoskeletons, being the 'default' skeleton to osteocentric beings such as ourselves. If cockroaches invented D&D, it would probably be otherwise.


I understood what you meant. I also understood what you actually said. They were not the same. There is a very important distinction between game terms defined in a glossary and common definitions found in a dictionary. Looking at the few example creatures I have, RAI seems to indicate an endoskeleton is required. RAW indicate no such thing. More importantly though, is a zombie spided actually gonna break the game? That's the crux of the biscuit.

[OracleofWuffing]

If you want to be really ridiculous about it, I suppose you could just cram someone else's skeletal system into a bag and give it to the spider/plant/ooze, but I'd probably get something thrown at me. :smalltongue:

[Ravens_cry]

I understood what you meant. I also understood what you actually said. They were not the same. There is a very important distinction between game terms defined in a glossary and common definitions found in a dictionary. Looking at the few example creatures I have, RAI seems to indicate an endoskeleton is required. RAW indicate no such thing. More importantly though, is a zombie spided actually gonna break the game? That's the crux of the biscuit.
Probably not, which is why I said "I'd allow it," though I'd personally prefer a separate 'animate vermin' spell. Besides zombie spiders, I like the idea of vermin 'skeletons', their shells hollow and echoing with a terrible clatter of brittle, but still sharp, mandibles and pincers.

[nyjastul69]

If you want to be really ridiculous about it, I suppose you could just cram someone else's skeletal system into a bag and give it to the spider/plant/ooze, but I'd probably get something thrown at me. :smalltongue:


By this (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/skeleton) definition plants have a skeleton. :smallwink:

[Ravens_cry]

By this (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/skeleton) definition plants have a skeleton. :smallwink:
By jove, you are right. Can't be motilecentric after all. Apparently you can even animate that which was not even animated in life!:smallamused:

[nyjastul69]

Probably not, which is why I said "I'd allow it," though I'd personally prefer a separate 'animate vermin' spell. Besides zombie spiders, I like the idea of vermin 'skeletons', their shells hollow and echoing with a terrible clatter of brittle, but still sharp, mandibles and pincers.

We are mostly in agreement here. I don't think the RAW is super iffy though. It seems quite clear.

[Coidzor]

By jove, you are right. Can't be motilecentric after all. Apparently you can even animate that which was not even animated in life!:smallamused:

Well, you know, it is magic, after all. XD

I can see it now... Skeletal Sponges!

[Erik Vale]

By jove, you are right. Can't be motilecentric after all. Apparently you can even animate that which was not even animated in life!:smallamused:

"I cut down the tree and animate it!"
"What?.."
Unfortunately, doesn't work because tree's are objects, but that opens up Myconids etc.

Also, I disagree with a animate vermin spell being a required separate spell, given the existence of:
-Diopsids
-Thri-Kreen

Neither of which are Vermin, both of which are Insects.

[Ravens_cry]

Well, you know, it is magic, after all. XD

I can see it now... Skeletal Sponges!
Heck, paramecium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramecium)skeletons (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1550-7408.2005.05202003_3_14.x/abstract)!

[Erik Vale]

Hmm, given that some oozes hold themselves in rigid shapes, given the above linked definition, could you consider some oozes to have skeletons.

Because a 'skeletal ooze' sounds rather... interesting.

[Coidzor]

Heck, paramecium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramecium)skeletons (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1550-7408.2005.05202003_3_14.x/abstract)!

Heh, Revived Fossil Dire Paramecium. :smallbiggrin:

[Devronq]

All of the words used to play D&D are defined. Some are game terms that have different denotations than common dictionary definitions of those same terms. In the absense of a game specific definition all definitions default to dictionary definitions. Both endoskeletons and exoskeletons are skeletal systems. There is no RAW reason not to allow for a zombie spider.

Actually this isn't true
"All of the words used to play dnd are defined. "
There is a rare few terms that have no definition or are soo poorly worded they could mean two entirely opposite things I don't want to derail with examples. But I do complelty agree with the rest of the paragraph.

[Ravens_cry]

Hmm, given that some oozes hold themselves in rigid shapes, given the above linked definition, could you consider some oozes to have skeletons.

Because a 'skeletal ooze' sounds rather... interesting.
They would be rather . . . diaphanous if that were possible.

[nyjastul69]

By jove, you are right. Can't be motilecentric after all. Apparently you can even animate that which was not even animated in life!:smallamused:

Just to be clear, I don't agree with that definition of a skeleton. I just thought it would be humourus to add it to the discussion. It wasn't the first link I found, but it wasn't far from it either. :smalleek: Trust all online sources, for they are always sound.:smallyuk:

[CRtwenty]

Well, you know, it is magic, after all. XD

I can see it now... Skeletal Sponges!

Who lives in an ancient crypt under the sea?

Anyway using an exoskeleton to create skeletal undead is just too cool of a concept not to run with. So I'd say go for it based on rule of cool alone. :smallcool:

[nyjastul69]

Actually this isn't true
"All of the words used to play dnd are defined. "
There is a rare few terms that have no definition or are soo poorly worded they could mean two entirely opposite things I don't want to derail with examples. But I do complelty agree with the rest of the paragraph.

Okay, ya got me. Things should rarely, if ever, be stated in absolute terms. My bad. I agree that many things in D&D could be defined more clearly, but what terms fall under the 'not defined by game or dictionary'? Feel free to PM me if you don't want to discuss those terms in this thread.

[lytokk]

Gelatinous cube with the slowly dissolving skeleton of some poor adventurer still inside of it?

[Dawgmoah]

Probably not, which is why I said "I'd allow it," though I'd personally prefer a separate 'animate vermin' spell. Besides zombie spiders, I like the idea of vermin 'skeletons', their shells hollow and echoing with a terrible clatter of brittle, but still sharp, mandibles and pincers.

Being hollow, what would stop you from putting a gallon or two of oil or something inside? Some poor guy hits it while holding a torch...
Or use an undead beetle to carry around your collection of marbles and caltrops.

[Kuulvheysoon]

How about the Bone Ooze?


http://crpp0001.uqtr.ca/w4/campagne/eTools_User/Portraits/Monster%20Manual%20II/Bone%20Ooze.jpg
Discuss.

[ArqArturo]

How about the Bone Ooze?


http://crpp0001.uqtr.ca/w4/campagne/eTools_User/Portraits/Monster%20Manual%20II/Bone%20Ooze.jpg
Discuss.

Zombified Bone Ooze sounds like something I'd find underneath my couch... Something I'd need to clean right now.

[Ravens_cry]

Being hollow, what would stop you from putting a gallon or two of oil or something inside? Some poor guy hits it while holding a torch...
Or use an undead beetle to carry around your collection of marbles and caltrops.
I think you'd need more than to simply be holding a torch. Hitting it with a torch on the other hand. . .

[Psyren]

I think anything with a carapace/exoskeleton should be fair game for the template. I don't see anywhere that specifies that the skeletal system has to be internal.

[hamishspence]

If we allow skeletal systems made of chitin rather than bone, how about ones made of cartilage?

Skeletal sharks sound like they could be fun.

[Glarx]

Hey everyone!

Thanks for the discussion on the matter! Lots of interesting thoughts brought to the table. I think zombie spiders are definitely doable, and that brings me great happiness. If only zombies didn't double the HD! :smallfrown:

Insofar as skeletal sharks go, I think the issue with that is that the Animate Dead spell specifies that creatures being raised as skeletons must have bones. I don't believe cartilage counts as a bone, and therefore, it couldn't be a skeleton. The Animate Dead spell does not have such a clause for zombies, however, which is why 1) it should be applicable to sharks and 2) should be applicable to anything with a skeletal structure, be it endo- or exoskeletal. The composition of the skeletal system shouldn't be in question. Just my views on the matter, anyhow!

[lytokk]

would a shark skeleton be more or less threatening than a real shark? shark zombie, maybe, shark skeleton?

[hamishspence]

Insofar as skeletal sharks go, I think the issue with that is that the Animate Dead spell specifies that creatures being raised as skeletons must have bones. I don't believe cartilage counts as a bone,

Shark teeth might though.

EDIT: Apparently, in the strictest sense, teeth are not made of bone, but of harder material.

[Grim Portent]

By my recollection sharks jaws are composed of bone.

[hamishspence]

By my recollection sharks jaws are composed of bone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_jaw


Lampreys and sharks only possess a cartilaginous endocranium, with both the upper and lower jaws being separate elements.

Cartilaginous fish, such as sharks and rays also lack a true maxilla. Their upper jaw is instead formed from a cartilagenous bar that is not homologous with the bone found in other vertebrates.

Cartilagenous fish, such as sharks, do not have any of the bones found in the lower jaw of other vertebrates. Instead, their lower jaw is composed of a cartilagenous structure homologous with the Meckel's cartilage of other groups. This also remains a significant element of the jaw in some primitive bony fish, such as sturgeons.

[Grim Portent]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_jaw

Drat, no animated shark jaw beartraps. :smallfrown:

[hamishspence]

I suppose you could use Animate Object on a set of shark jaws.

[Grim Portent]

I suppose you could use Animate Object on a set of shark jaws.

Genius! I smell a pirate campaign on the winds. :smallbiggrin:

[hamishspence]

There's also a spell in Spell Compendium (Manyjaws) that summons up creates a bunch of magical shark jaws made of pure force:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/spellcomp_gallery/92250.jpg

[Dark_Nohn]

Pretty sure RAI is saying no zombie blobs, no zombie fungus, no zombie jellyfishes. Zombie giant spiders work too well to disclude, but then again, I dunno if anyone could handle a giant zombie millipede, things are too damn creepy as it is.


Hmm, given that some oozes hold themselves in rigid shapes, given the above linked definition, could you consider some oozes to have skeletons.

Because a 'skeletal ooze' sounds rather... interesting.

Even better: arcane animated marrow

[Psyren]

There's also a spell in Spell Compendium (Manyjaws) that summons up a bunch of magical shark jaws:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/spellcomp_gallery/92250.jpg

It evokes them actually - they're composed of force. So they're really "jaws" in name and appearance only, they function more like blades of force than any sort of bone or cartilage.

[hamishspence]

Pretty sure RAI is saying no zombie blobs, no zombie fungus, no zombie jellyfishes. Zombie giant spiders work too well to disclude, but then again, I dunno if anyone could handle a giant zombie millipede, things are too damn creepy as it is.

D&D doesn't seem to have much in the way of stats for millipedes. It does have centipede stats though.

Forgotten Realms had stats for various giant arachnoids besides spiders and centipedes (whip scorpion, whip spider, solifugid) . As well as velvet worms.



It evokes them actually - they're composed of force. So they're really "jaws" in name and appearance only, they function more like blades of force than any sort of bone or cartilage.
Good point.

[Talderas]

Quick question. Under the zombie template, the language indicates that any corporal creature with a skeleton may be raised as a zombie. My question is, does that mean endoskeleton necessarily? Or can an exoskeleton count for this purpose?

If you're looking for a RAW answer I don't believe one exists. For a common sense answer then I would say that the creature needs to have a skeletal system AND flesh to qualify as a valid zombie candidate. For an exoskeletal creature that just means all the putrid and decaying flesh would just be contained within the carapace.

Zombies are generally inferior choices to skeletons. Skeletal spiders would also be rather indistinguishable from a normal spider to the common eye where as zombie spiders would very obviously move much slower than a normal spider. Otherwise both zombie and skeletal spiders would pretty much look extrememly similar to a live spider.

[hamishspence]

A possible exception would be in the case of flying creatures (skeletons generally can't fly).

Skeletal spiders would also be rather indistinguishable from a normal spider to the common eye where as zombie spiders would very obviously move much slower than a normal spider. Otherwise both zombie and skeletal spiders would pretty much look extrememly similar to a live spider.
A case could be made that since you are using "the bones of a creature" when creating a skeleton (Animate Dead spell) you can't have Vermin skeletons- since they don't have bones per se.

[Psyren]

I would say a zombie spider would have cloudy/milky eyes and jerky motions (staggered.) I would then require a Perception check to notice details like this, with a bonus granted if the player has Knowledge (Religion), FE: Undead or similar.

[pwykersotz]

I let one of my players use Animate Dead to raise a Thorciasid (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/monsters/thorciasid.htm) which breaks both the HD cap for that spell and raises a creature with an exoskeleton, but he named it Scuttles and used it as his mount which made me smile, so he still has it.

[Maginomicon]

If cockroaches invented D&D, it would probably be otherwise.
What do you mean "if" ?

(Too good a chance to not use it)

[Glarx]

Pretty sure RAI is saying no zombie blobs, no zombie fungus, no zombie jellyfishes. Zombie giant spiders work too well to disclude, but then again, I dunno if anyone could handle a giant zombie millipede, things are too damn creepy as it is.Well, I'd go one step further and say RAW prevents zombie blobs, fungi and jellyfish. Those three lack skeletal structures, to my knowledge, and they lack 'true anatomy,' as evinced by their immunity to criticals. (Note: not everything immune to criticals lacks true anatomy [a phrase which, to my knowledge, isn't defined in D&D]. However, in the Rogue's sneak attack information, it states that "a rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack." Therefore, plants and oozes {what does a jellyfish count as? Are they statted anywhere? I'm not intimately familiar with water campaigns or their potential denizens!} are not viable recipients for the zombie template.)


A case could be made that since you are using "the bones of a creature" when creating a skeleton (Animate Dead spell) you can't have Vermin skeletons- since they don't have bones per se.I'm not sure if per se is even needed -- exoskeletal creatures lack bones, don't they?

EDIT:
Zombies are generally inferior choices to skeletons. Skeletal spiders would also be rather indistinguishable from a normal spider to the common eye where as zombie spiders would very obviously move much slower than a normal spider. Otherwise both zombie and skeletal spiders would pretty much look extrememly similar to a live spider.As above -- skeletal spiders aren't an option at all, by my reckoning. As for zombies being inferior? Maybe, but fell animate doesn't give the option between skeleton or zombie. :smallsmile: ('But Glarx, we didn't know you were worried about fell animate!' Well sure, but it doesn't have any bearing on the question of skeletal systems. :smallwink:)

[Psyren]

I'm not sure if per se is even needed -- exoskeletal creatures lack bones, don't they?

That depends on how you define "bone" - and given that the bones of some creatures are constructed differently (e.g. dragonbone vs. chicken bone) I'm not certain that there is a one-size-fits-all definition here that does exclude carapaces.

[Glarx]

That depends on how you define "bone" - and given that the bones of some creatures are constructed differently (e.g. dragonbone vs. chicken bone) I'm not certain that there is a one-size-fits-all definition here that does exclude carapaces.Are there any examples of bones that aren't used to support a creature's anatomy? I'm not familiar with external bones (not that my unfamiliarity should be taken as proof that such bones don't exist -- I'm simply stating my ignorance on the matter. If I'm wrong, let me know!). A dragon's bone and a chicken's bone, while different in construction and perhaps composition, are still endoskeletal features that are used to support the creature's musculature. Although that isn't a definition which I'm comfortable using as a strict definition of what a bone is.

However, I am comfortable using Wikipedia's. Bones are rigid organs that constitute part of the endoskeleton of vertebrates. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone)

[Psyren]

Animate Dead doesn't say "endoskeleton" though - it says skeleton. An exoskeleton is still a skeleton, and it is just as supportive to the creature.

[Glarx]

Animate Dead doesn't say "endoskeleton" though - it says skeleton. An exoskeleton is still a skeleton, and it is just as supportive to the creature.Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) doesn't mention skeletons at all, just bones*. If a bone is defined with respect to endoskeletons strictly, and Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) requires the corpse to have bones, then I believe it's not a logical fallacy to say that Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) requires an endoskeleton. That said, I could be incorrect in my syllogism. I think that's a syllogism, anyways.

*Okay, yes, it mentions skeletons, but it doesn't claim that the corpse in question needs a skeleton. There are two options: "a mostly intact corpse" being the first, "skeleton" being the second. The language thereafter says that "the corpse must have bones," but it doesn't say the corpse has to have skeletons, which is what I meant when I said it doesn't mention skeletons at all. However, I do admit the spell mentions skeletons. I was unclear.

EDIT: Hmm... the spell itself requires a corpse as its target, so I don't actually believe the spell can be used on a skeleton that isn't part of a corpse. Which seems bizarre. Unless we're saying that a skeleton counts as a fleshless corpse for the sake of this spell, in which case the language of "the corpse must have bones" would apply to any skeleton whatsoever, which would prevent exoskeletons from being a viable target for the spell. At least, I believe that's how it would go.

[Scow2]

Well, you know, it is magic, after all. XD

I can see it now... Skeletal Sponges!

Skeletal Giant Sponges? The world is not ready. :smalleek:

At least you can airdrown a normal sponge.

Wait... wrong game/forum.

[Jeff the Green]

Are there any examples of bones that aren't used to support a creature's anatomy? I'm not familiar with external bones (not that my unfamiliarity should be taken as proof that such bones don't exist -- I'm simply stating my ignorance on the matter. If I'm wrong, let me know!)

For the former, there's the maleus, incus, and stapes in the middle ear. Also the patella and the hyoid, which protect vital parts of the anatomy and provide more efficient leverage rather than supporting things. There are also vestigial bones.

For the latter, osteoderms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoderm)—bony growths in the skin that function variously as armor and heat regulating organs, and found in crocodylians, lizards, dinosaurs, giant ground sloths, glyptodonts, and armadillos, among others. Also the plates of the stegosaurus

[Glarx]

For the former, there's the maleus, incus, and stapes in the middle ear. Also the patella and the hyoid, which protect vital parts of the anatomy and provide more efficient leverage rather than supporting things. There are also vestigial bones.

For the latter, osteoderms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoderm)—bony growths in the skin that function variously as armor and heat regulating organs, and found in crocodylians, lizards, dinosaurs, giant ground sloths, glyptodonts, and armadillos, among others. Also the plates of the stegosaurusVery cool! As I said, I wasn't satisfied with my own musings on bones to use it as a definition for what a bone ought to be. I don't believe the maleus, incus, staples, patella, hyoid or any vestigial bones go against the definition Wikipedia provided, however (most likely because that definition was made with respect to those bones!).

As for the osteoderms, I don't think those count as bones, do they? Rather, for our definition of a bone, should we look at chemical composition? I'm coming from an endoskeletal bias, I admit, and simply saying "osteoderms wouldn't satisfy the definition of a bone!" is meaningless. But should bone be extended to cover osteoderms? Or are we content in having two separate identifications -- namely, osteoderms and bones, with the former being external and the former being internal? Also, are there any exoskeletal creatures that are osteoderms? Or are they strictly endoskeletal creatures?

I admit, I may be using the term osteoderm incorrectly, and I apologize. I'm unsure whether the creature capable of creating this organ is called an osteoderm, or whether the organ itself is called an osteoderm. Please forgive me if I'm mangling the biological terminology. :smallredface:

[Psyren]

Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) doesn't mention skeletons at all, just bones*. If a bone is defined with respect to endoskeletons strictly, and Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) requires the corpse to have bones, then I believe it's not a logical fallacy to say that Animate Dead (Skeleton Option) requires an endoskeleton. That said, I could be incorrect in my syllogism. I think that's a syllogism, anyways.

Well obviously if you say that "only bones in an endoskeleton count as bones" then yes, only endoskeletons can be reanimated. But I happen to disagree with that definition. Ultimately it's up to the DM since bone isn't defined anywhere in D&D.

[Glarx]

Well obviously if you say that "only bones in an endoskeleton count as bones" then yes, only endoskeletons can be reanimated. But I happen to disagree with that definition. Ultimately it's up to the DM since bone isn't defined anywhere in D&D.Out of curiosity, do you have a different definition to provide? As I said, I'm not confident in the definition I came up with in my sort of word-slurry above, but then I fell back on a definition provided by Wikipedia (because, as we all know, Wikipedia is the font of all knowledge). If there's another definition available, I'd love to know what it is -- and that's an honest desire, not sarcastic. :smallsmile:

[Coidzor]

would a shark skeleton be more or less threatening than a real shark? shark zombie, maybe, shark skeleton?

Well, it'd have BAB 1 instead of BAB 2 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shark.htm).

[TuggyNE]

Well obviously if you say that "only bones in an endoskeleton count as bones" then yes, only endoskeletons can be reanimated. But I happen to disagree with that definition. Ultimately it's up to the DM since bone isn't defined anywhere in D&D.

Since terms that are not specifically defined default to their real-world usage, and since there is no possible usage in which "this insect is covered in bone" (referring to the exoskeleton) is correct, that generally won't make a difference, and it's not up to the DM in any case.

[Psyren]

there is no possible usage in which "this insect is covered in bone" (referring to the exoskeleton) is correct,

Exoskeletons can in fact be made of bone. Just ask any tortoise.

[Glarx]

Exoskeletons can in fact be made of bone. Just ask any tortoise.Only if we're taking plastron and carapace to be bone. :smallwink:

[TuggyNE]

Exoskeletons can in fact be made of bone. Just ask any tortoise.

Tortoises have bones inside too, which, in the particular case, seems to make it irrelevant, but I was unaware that they're formally considered to have both an exo- and an endoskeleton (both bony). Learn something new every day, I guess.

Still, OK, let's put it this way: nothing without an endoskeleton has bones. (*sits back and waits for counter-example, in order to gain yet more knowledge*)

[Red Rubber Band]

Something to chew on, not sure if relevant to this stage of the discussion or not, but Echinoderms have an endoskeleton but no bones. As do sponges.

[Psyren]

Still, OK, let's put it this way: nothing without an endoskeleton has bones. (*sits back and waits for counter-example, in order to gain yet more knowledge*)

Again, "endoskeleton" is an artificial restriction being made up by some in this thread. The spell does not say this. All I had to prove was that exoskeletons can be made out of bone, and they can. Exoskeletons are skeletons.

[TuggyNE]

Again, "endoskeleton" is an artificial restriction being made up by some in this thread. The spell does not say this. All I had to prove was that exoskeletons can be made out of bone, and they can. Exoskeletons are skeletons.

That's not quite it. The point is, only things with bones can be re-animated, and only things with normal (i.e., endo) skeletons have bones. No vermin reanimation or much of anything else.

In other words, yes, in the technical sense it's possible to raise an exoskeletal creature. That doesn't mean it's at all possible to raise most creatures with exoskeletons.

[Talderas]

That's not quite it. The point is, only things with bones can be re-animated, and only things with normal (i.e., endo) skeletons have bones. No vermin reanimation or much of anything else.

In other words, yes, in the technical sense it's possible to raise an exoskeletal creature. That doesn't mean it's at all possible to raise most creatures with exoskeletons.

You have two sets of restrictions. One is the within animate dead, which requires bones. The other is with the zombie template which simply requires a corporeal creature with a skeletal system. The argument of whether a creature with an exoskeleton can become a zombie only matters for the avenue used to create the zombie. A creature with an exoskeleton is a valid recipient of the zombie template as the creature is corporeal and it has a skeletal system.

Thus if a DM wants a zombie spider he can have it since he can rule 0 his way about and say that there's a necromancy spell that does it or there's some weird magical force flying around flipping life the bird.

[Glarx]

Again, "endoskeleton" is an artificial restriction being made up by some in this thread. The spell does not say this. All I had to prove was that exoskeletons can be made out of bone, and they can. Exoskeletons are skeletons.I'm afraid I disagree. You have not shown an exoskeleton can be made of bone, as carapace and plastron are not bone. Furthermore, to my knowledge, creatures have one skeletal system -- and it's either endoskeletal or exoskeletal. Additionally, no one is questioning that exoskeletons are skeletons. That's not at stake. What's at stake is whether an exoskeleton has a bone -- and the definitions for bones that I can find indicate that bones are defined in terms of endoskeletons. I still invite you to provide a different definition of a bone that is not set in terms of an endoskeleton. :smallsmile:


You have two sets of restrictions. One is the within animate dead, which requires bones. The other is with the zombie template which simply requires a corporeal creature with a skeletal system. The argument of whether a creature with an exoskeleton can become a zombie only matters for the avenue used to create the zombie. A creature with an exoskeleton is a valid recipient of the zombie template as the creature is corporeal and it has a skeletal system.

Thus if a DM wants a zombie spider he can have it since he can rule 0 his way about and say that there's a necromancy spell that does it or there's some weird magical force flying around flipping life the bird.The discussion between Psyren and TuggyNE isn't about zombies at the moment, but Skeletons. Animate Dead doesn't necessarily require bones -- it only requires bones in the event you want the creature known as a Skeleton. Anything with a skeleton is viable for the zombie template according to the spell, but if you want to raise something as a Skeleton, the corpse in question must have bones. For this reason, it may behoove us to define what a bone is. The definition I have offered defines a bone as something found in an endoskeleton, but I am fully open to a definition which doesn't if one exists.

The cursory research I've performed on the term bone indicates that we could phrase it in terms of vertebrates, although vertebrates are (to my knowledge) endoskeletal creatures.

On further consideration, even in the event we take a tortoise as having an exoskeleton in addition to an endoskeleton, that would mean we could have a Skeletal tortoise, not that all exoskeletons are available for Skeleton-izing. And I don't believe anyone would argue we couldn't have a Skeletal tortoise -- especially because they also possess an endoskeleton. :smallsmile:

(I've taken to capitalizing the word Skeleton when I'm referring to the 3.5 monster, as that way I can be clear about whether I mean "the creature" versus "the supporty medical thing.")

[Psyren]

I'm afraid I disagree. You have not shown an exoskeleton can be made of bone, as carapace and plastron are not bone.

I have actually (see again, tortoise), but what I haven't found is an animal with only an exoskeleton made of bone.

So I guess you could then say that skeletal crabs are not possible. I would personally allow it, making them hollow husks, but I can see why others would not.

Regardless, zombie crabs/spiders/etc. are definitely possible because all you need there is a corpse.

[Talderas]

The discussion between Psyren and TuggyNE isn't about zombies at the moment, but Skeletons. Animate Dead doesn't necessarily require bones -- it only requires bones in the event you want the creature known as a Skeleton. Anything with a skeleton is viable for the zombie template according to the spell, but if you want to raise something as a Skeleton, the corpse in question must have bones. For this reason, it may behoove us to define what a bone is. The definition I have offered defines a bone as something found in an endoskeleton, but I am fully open to a definition which doesn't if one exists.

Both the skeleton and zombie template only have the skeletal system and corporeal requirements. Exoskeletons are skeletal systems. So as I said, whether animate dead is a valid avenue to create them is a valid question but skeletal crabs and spiders can exist. So while it's an interesting question, the fact is a GM can include them and thanks to the rules a wizard could create an animate dead spell that doesn't require bones to create a skeleton. Other spells that create undead may also be capable of creating skeletons from exoskeletal corpses.

[Glarx]

I have actually (see again, tortoise), but what I haven't found is an animal with only an exoskeleton made of bone.

So I guess you could then say that skeletal crabs are not possible. I would personally allow it, making them hollow husks, but I can see why others would not.

Regardless, zombie crabs/spiders/etc. are definitely possible because all you need there is a corpse.Forgive me, I should have been clearer. The tortoise shell is, insofar as chemical composition is concerned, no more bone than cartilage is. That is why I do not take the example of the tortoise as fulfilling the claim you've set forth. If that's unfair -- if carapace and plastron are bone -- then I will happy accept the tortoise. But that's my reasoning for claiming you haven't found an exoskeleton made of bone. :smallsmile:

But we agree on zombies! :smallbiggrin:


Both the skeleton and zombie template only have the skeletal system and corporeal requirements. Exoskeletons are skeletal systems. So as I said, whether animate dead is a valid avenue to create them is a valid question but skeletal crabs and spiders can exist.Ah! Now I understand your statement. I apologize -- before I had been misinterpreting your words. If I understand you now (Animate Dead can't make skeletal spiders, but the skeletal template can legally be applied to spiders) then I agree. Although I wonder how one could come across such a spider.

[Psyren]

The tortoise shell is, insofar as chemical composition is concerned, no more bone than cartilage is. That is why I do not take the example of the tortoise as fulfilling the claim you've set forth.

You appear to be relying on wikipedia, and wikipedia calls it bone, so that's really all I care about for the purposes of that claim. After all, I doubt that dragonbone has the same chemical composition as human bones too, considering you can make durable armor and weapons out of the former. In other words, it's the name that matters, all bringing chemistry into this will accomplish is murdering more catgirls wholesale.



But we agree on zombies! :smallbiggrin:

We do, but I don't really see a huge enough difference between them to allow one but not the other.

[Glarx]

This Wikipedia page? (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise) I thought it pointed out the different substances. Cartilage isn't bone, and that distinction seems important for things like sharks. In the same way, carapace oughn't be, nor plastron. But regardless, this is why we need to agree on a definition of a bone in order to achieve a consensus on this. :smallredface:

But do you agree that, even if the tortoise counts as simultaneously possessing an endoskeletal and exoskeletal system, it wouldn't make all exoskeletal creatures legal targets for the Skeleton option of Animate Dead?

[Talderas]

Although I wonder how one could come across such a spider.

There's plenty of ways. The questions is "Do you want skeletal carapaces?" if the answer is yes then two ways I can think of off hand is weird evil magic pocket or a wizard creates a new spell that animates skeletons that doesn't require bone.

[Glarx]

There's plenty of ways. The questions is "Do you want skeletal carapaces?" if the answer is yes then two ways I can think of off hand is weird evil magic pocket or a wizard creates a new spell that animates skeletons that doesn't require bone.Weird evil magic pocket? :smallconfused:

[Talderas]

Weird evil magic pocket? :smallconfused:

I do believe there is fluff that suggests that skeletons and zombies are created occasionally without direct necromancer influence.

Also deities.

[Mono Vertigo]

Well, you know, it is magic, after all. XD

I can see it now... Skeletal Sponges!

Perhaps I've played too much Dwarf Fortress, but these two words put together fill me with dread.
Ninja edit: apparently we're two. Don't underestimate undead sponges.

[Glarx]

I do believe there is fluff that suggests that skeletons and zombies are created occasionally without direct necromancer influence.

Also deities.Ah, okay. So without DM fiat, we agree there's no way to produce skeleton spiders? Or would you say that the summon undead line could conjure the skittering buggers?

Admittedly summon doesn't equal create, but I feel the language should be straightforward enough for our purposes. :smallsmile:

[illyahr]

1

a: one of the hard parts of the skeleton of a vertebrate

b: any of various hard animal substances or structures (as baleen or ivory) akin to or resembling bone

c: the hard largely calcareous connective tissue of which the adult skeleton of most vertebrates is chiefly composed

If you go by the second section, an exoskeleton could be considered bone for the purposes of the spell.

[Psyren]

But do you agree that, even if the tortoise counts as simultaneously possessing an endoskeletal and exoskeletal system, it wouldn't make all exoskeletal creatures legal targets for the Skeleton option of Animate Dead?

As you yourself said, that depends on how you define "bone." I consider carapace to count, you don't. I fully acknowledge that my interpretation may be unintended or unscientific, but I like the idea of hollow undead crabs too much to really care.

[Talderas]

Ah, okay. So without DM fiat, we agree there's no way to produce skeleton spiders? Or would you say that the summon undead line could conjure the skittering buggers?

Admittedly summon doesn't equal create, but I feel the language should be straightforward enough for our purposes. :smallsmile:

That depends on what you call GM fiat. The rules do provide for spellcasters research and creating their own spells so it's definitely not pure Rule 0 territory.

[Glarx]

That depends on what you call GM fiat. The rules do provide for spellcasters research and creating their own spells so it's definitely not pure Rule 0 territory.It's mentioned, but as there are no rules, I believe it is Rule 0 territory. The viability for any spell as a spell, how to research it, et cetera -- that's up to the DM. I'm unsure if that is what you'd call fiat, as I've never been 100% on the definition, but I feel like that should satisfy the definition. :smallredface:

EDIT: If there ARE rules for it, please please please tell me. It would be soooo cooool!

[Jeff the Green]

As for the osteoderms, I don't think those count as bones, do they? Rather, for our definition of a bone, should we look at chemical composition? I'm coming from an endoskeletal bias, I admit, and simply saying "osteoderms wouldn't satisfy the definition of a bone!" is meaningless. But should bone be extended to cover osteoderms? Or are we content in having two separate identifications -- namely, osteoderms and bones, with the former being external and the former being internal? Also, are there any exoskeletal creatures that are osteoderms? Or are they strictly endoskeletal creatures?


Forgive me, I should have been clearer. The tortoise shell is, insofar as chemical composition is concerned, no more bone than cartilage is. That is why I do not take the example of the tortoise as fulfilling the claim you've set forth. If that's unfair -- if carapace and plastron are bone -- then I will happy accept the tortoise. But that's my reasoning for claiming you haven't found an exoskeleton made of bone. :smallsmile:

Osteoderms, carapaces, and plastrons are most certainly bones. Osteoderms are metaplastic bones, or bones that grow, shrink, and change size throughout an organism's life. They (metaplastic bones) are relatively rare, but are most notably found in ceratopsians, which is what caused us to mistake elderly Triceratopses for a separate genus (Torosaurus). Carapaces and plastrons consist of skeletal and dermal bone (i.e. bone that arises from calcification of cartilage and bone that doesn't) and are covered with scutes (similar to scales, made of keratin).

1

However, there's an interesting case that hasn't been discussed:

Cephalopods

Animate dead and the zombie template specify that the base creature must have a skeletal system. While cephalopods (and jellyfish and sea stars and worms) have neither endo- nor exoskeletons, they do have hydrostatic skeletons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_skeleton), which most certainly counts as a skeletal system.

While this is probably elevating RAW over RAI, Rule of Cool is also on my side here. :smallcool:

http://www.crashoctopus.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/meglyman_zombiesquid.jpg (http://www.crashoctopus.com/2012/06/05/zombie-squid/)

[Glarx]

Jeff the Green, just to be clear, are you saying exoskeletons are made of bones?

[hamishspence]

They (metaplastic bones) are relatively rare, but are most notably found in ceratopsians, which is what caused us to mistake elderly Triceratopses for a separate genus (Torosaurus).

Opinion still seems somewhat divided on that issue.

[dascarletm]

With the talk of an undead shark why hasn't this (www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVQDcKCINSM) been brought up (or did I miss it)?

[Jeff the Green]

Jeff the Green, just to be clear, are you saying exoskeletons are made of bones?

Some are, certainly. Turtles' and tortoises', obviously, and you might be able to argue that osteoderms count as an exoskeleton, though probably not.

However, only vertebrates have bones. (Which is not to say that all vertebrates have bones; for example Agnatha like lamprey and cartilaginous fish don't.) Bones are very specific structures made of collagen and calcium phosphate. Exoskeletons can be made of a similar material formed of a chitin-calcium carbonate complex, but they're not the same. For one, bone is alive and grows, metabolizes, and eventually dies. Chitinous exoskeletons aren't and don't, which is why they eventually have to be replaced entirely.


Opinion still seems somewhat divided on that issue.

Yes, but in general it's a bad idea to bet against Jack Horner. :smalltongue:

[hamishspence]

His "T. rex was an obligate scavenger" theory never really took off- possibly because of evidence of healed T. rex bites in herbivores.

And his "Spinosaurus was a macropredator" theory (exemplified by Jurassic Park III) seems to have come in for quite a bit of scorn.

[ShurikVch]

Bonemail (undead graft, Libris Mortis) can add bones to the body and make it acceptable to zombification. 16K gp is a bit expensive, but still...

Also, Exoskeleton armor. Put a dead creature in it, then cast Animate Dead...