Why is Durkon's soul trapped?

[konradknox]

First off, this is NOT a complaint about the plot.
I'm not crying "inconsistency!" as I am sure there is a specific reason behind it. But I just don't understand it and feel the desire for clarification if possible.

Why is Durkon trapped?

Durkon said to Malack that dwarves who die an honorable death in battle go directly to Thor, unless they die of sickness, with some gray area for heroic death while contracting the sickness, which does not matter much because most dwarves who get sick will pick a fight and die in battle, and also exception being alcohol related deaths, though that may be a joke.

Circumstances of Durkon's death were so utterly heroic, he should have went straight to Thor. I mean, he died like a boss, protecting selflessly the most annoying member of the party. There was absolutely nothing but pure goodness driving him in this fight. He died fighting an undead foe.

Why did Thor not claim him the moment he died while Malack was contemplating the siring?

Was Durkon's soul prevented from leaving the body, or was it forced back?
Did Durkon's religion lie about the rules?
Did Hel somehow cheat the rules?
Does vampirism not count as a standard disease? Does fighting a vampire not count as heroic death?

Will this be explained?

[Gift Jeraff]

The common idea is that that is simply how vampires and certain other undead work--like a Soul Bind spell.

[DaveMcW]

Being turned into an undead creature prevents Resurrection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm) from working. That is the core D&D rule.

The soul being trapped is a logical explanation of why that is the rule.

The other possible explanation is that the soul is corrupted, not trapped. The purpose of #946 is to put that theory to rest.

[Everyl]

It's worth noting that Malack didn't decide to vampirize Durkon when he zapped his corpse with the staff - he made that decision when he killed Durkon by draining his blood dry. Durkon would have risen as a vampire anyway after 1d4 days (the "three days in the grave" that Malack refers to). All that the staff did was accelerate the process.

Since Durkon rising as a vampire was set into motion by his cause of death, I'd assume that his soul was trapped from that moment, too.

[factotum]

I agree with Everyl. Durkon was always going to be a vampire, so the question then becomes, what normally happens to the soul of a person who will become a vampire? It seems reasonable to assume that the soul remains trapped in the body, either to take control of it again when it arises as the vampire or to act as patsy for the spirit that enters in to do that job. (Which one happens might depend on the alignment of the soul, or it might have been an unintended side-effect of Malack's "hurry up and rise, already!" spell).

[Reis Tahlen]

I think it's whatever entity inside Durkon's body who kept his sould inside, in order to have access to his knowledge. So it was intended by Hel, not a spell accident.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Presumably, Durkon's soul is trapped because something is preventing him from leaving. This is probably a side-affect of the vampirazation process. I imagine that if Durkon's soul was released, it would probably go to Thor.

The reason why Dwarves fall under Hel's purview probably means that she gets to put the new soul in the body, not that she gets the old soul.

[Killer Angel]

Indeed. A trapped soul, cannot go in the afterlife.

[cheesecake]

Some thinking I was doing.

Durkon didn't speak in his accent until Nale encounters him. He says "Aye..Mebbe I haf changed"

Prior to that he spoke normally. Minutes before that he said "Master I have the ...."

I believe Mallack was expecting Durkon to inhabit the vampire form, not a random evil soul. He seemed to have an odd connection to him. To me if I was expecting vampire Durkon to be Durkon as a vampire then I'd expect the accent. I feel Mallack only turned Durkon because he was hoping for a like minded friend that he could enjoy talking with for all of eternity.

Mallack did not seem surprised that he did not speak with his accent after being turned.

Is the thralled vampire only a shell that walks and takes orders but has no personality? If this the case no wonder he wasn't surprised. Durkon would come out as the Vampire matured.

Is this because as soon as Mallack was killed the thralldom was cancelled and allowed Durkon/Hel to have full control of the body and therefore start practicing his act?

Obviously the High Priest of Hel is putting the accent on. Did he suddenly bust into the accent because through Durkon's memories he knew the connection to Nale?

I have no plausible thought that all Vampires are inhabited by a random soul from whatever god of the vampire that turned them. I don't see it. Mallack made the statement the he wouldn't be the same man that Durkon knew if he were raised. But I believe that's because he figures that if he was raised he would not have the memories he had awhile he was a vampire because he was technically "dead".

My personal belief is that this was a special case and Hel jumped at the chance to put someone in place in a group going after the gates. Who else would give her that knowledge and power?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

The reason why Durkon didn't speak with the accent as a thrall was because the High Priest of Hel had probably already taken over. Since he was a thrall, he couldn't act against Malak, but he wouldn't have an accent.

I think that it is odd that Malak didn't expect the accent. After all, if Malak believes that Durkon is the soul in the body, then Durkon should still be speaking with the accent. Even if he is a thrall he will still shape sounds the same way.

[Vladier]

The reason why Durkon didn't speak with the accent as a thrall was because the High Priest of Hel had probably already taken over. Since he was a thrall, he couldn't act against Malak, but he wouldn't have an accent.

I think that it is odd that Malak didn't expect the accent. After all, if Malak believes that Durkon is the soul in the body, then Durkon should still be speaking with the accent. Even if he is a thrall he will still shape sounds the same way.

The undead don't breathe and actually speak through vibrations the dark magic that animates them makes. At least that's true for skeletal undead but I don't think vampires would be really different, though I guess they would speak like they did in life based on preference or habit and a thrall, being a mindless servant of his sire (in Rich's version, in normal D&D vampire thralls are people of their own except that they have to serve their sire and obey his commands) wouldn't have those.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

If Malak controls what Durkon says, why does he even bother have him say it? He already knows what he's going to say, since he's making him say it. So, why bother having him talk at all, if that's the case?

[veti]

I really don't get this theory that Malack, of all people, didn't understand how vamping Durkon was going to work.

He knew a dark spirit was going to move in and cohabit with Durkon's soul. His own soul's experience of cohabiting would have been very different from Durkon's, since he was a willing participant in his own vamping - but the basic procedure would be the same.

Because the new spirit has access to all Durkon's memories and knowledge, it's capable of having any conversation Durkon could have had, although if talking to Malack it'd be likely to filter this through its own moral outlook. That's why Malack was looking forward to talking to him. There's no inconsistency there.

As to the original question: one thing Durkon definitely didn't do was max out his "Knowledge: Religion" skill. He bemoans the lack here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html), and consistently shows an ignorance of the subject that is quite remarkable, for a cleric. (Although maybe that's his way of emulating Thor's general "knowledge is for wonks" attitude.) The reason he smiles in death is just that he has no idea what's in store for him - he thinks he'll go straight to Valhalla, because he doesn't have the knowledge ranks to know better.

[Vladier]

If Malak controls what Durkon says, why does he even bother have him say it? He already knows what he's going to say, since he's making him say it. So, why bother having him talk at all, if that's the case?

I didn't say that Malack controls what Durkon says, only that Durkon doesn't control how he says things because he's a thrall and has little-to-no free will and personality (again, in the Giant's version, who has every mind-control effect severely more powerful, even Dominate Person doesn't really turn a subject of the spell into a mindless being unless the caster wishes that to be, V does that with Suggestion and gets a telepathic feedback from Dominated kobold whereas the spell's description specifically says that isn't the case).

[Thanatosia]

His own soul's experience of cohabiting would have been very different from Durkon's, since he was a willing participant in his own vamping - but the basic procedure would be the same.
Where does it say that Malak was willingly Vampirized? I do not recall this info.

[Benthesquid]

I'm going to go ahead and predict that while Malack did cohabitate with a dark spirit, he was either fully or largely in control. I'll further suggest that he expected this to be the case with Durkon, and go for the hat trick by saying that the reason it wasn't is at least partially because Durkon was released by thralldom traumatically be his maker's death, rather than being granted free will under more controlled conditions.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I didn't say that Malack controls what Durkon says, only that Durkon doesn't control how he says things because he's a thrall and has little-to-no free will and personality (again, in the Giant's version, who has every mind-control effect severely more powerful, even Dominate Person doesn't really turn a subject of the spell into a mindless being unless the caster wishes that to be, V does that with Suggestion and gets a telepathic feedback from Dominated kobold whereas the spell's description specifically says that isn't the case).
If Malak is only giving orders to Durkon,and if it is Durkon's soul actually carrying out the orders, then he should be using his normal accent. Malak is not telling Durkon to talk in a different accent, after all. So, if Malak is unsurprised by the lack of the accent, he must know that Durkon wouldn't have been the same.

[littlebum2002]

I think that it is odd that Malak didn't expect the accent. After all, if Malak believes that Durkon is the soul in the body, then Durkon should still be speaking with the accent. Even if he is a thrall he will still shape sounds the same way.

So your saying that Malack, a vampire, doesn't understand how vampires work?

I must say I vehemently disagree. Malack knew exactly what was going to happen to Durkon and his soul. After all, the exact same thing happened to him.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

So your saying that Malack, a vampire, doesn't understand how vampires work?

I must say I vehemently disagree. Malack knew exactly what was going to happen to Durkon and his soul. After all, the exact same thing happened to him.

I'm sorry, I don't think I was being clear with that statement. What I meant was that if the poster that I was responding to was correct, and Durkon is a special case, then that would be at odds with how Malak is unsurprised by Durkon's accent.

[Zmeoaice]

I think that it is odd that Malack didn't expect the accent. After all, if Malack believes that Durkon is the soul in the body, then Durkon should still be speaking with the accent. Even if he is a thrall he will still shape sounds the same way.

He didn't expect an accent, because Durkula was a Thrall at that time. Thralls don't have personalities, they only exist to serve, like golems. If Malack released Durkula and wasn't surprised by no accent, they you'd have a point.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

So, because Thralls don't have personalities, they now speak like whoever is their master?

[BaronOfHell]

So your saying that Malack, a vampire, doesn't understand how vampires work?


Yeah, what's up with that?? Next time he'll say salamanders don't know how they regenerate.

[littlebum2002]

I'm sorry, I don't think I was being clear with that statement. What I meant was that if the poster that I was responding to was correct, and Durkon is a special case, then that would be at odds with how Malak is unsurprised by Durkon's accent.

Gotcha




I think Malack knew exactly what was going on. Durkon was trapped, and "some other entity" was in charge, so he would not expect an accent from this entity. I think the High Priest passed it off as "thralls speak differently for some reason", but in reality Malack simply had no reason to tell his thrall to have an accent to try to fool people.

[ChristianSt]

As to the original question: one thing Durkon definitely didn't do was max out his "Knowledge: Religion" skill. He bemoans the lack here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0052.html), and consistently shows an ignorance of the subject that is quite remarkable, for a cleric. (Although maybe that's his way of emulating Thor's general "knowledge is for wonks" attitude.) The reason he smiles in death is just that he has no idea what's in store for him - he thinks he'll go straight to Valhalla, because he doesn't have the knowledge ranks to know better.

He doesn't smile because he doesn't know what will happen with his spirit.

He does smile because he knows (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0333.html) that he will return home.

[veti]

He doesn't smile because he doesn't know what will happen with his spirit.

He does smile because he knows (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0333.html) that he will return home.

Yeah... somehow, I don't think Durkon would be so happy about his body returning home, if he knew the condition it was going to be in at the time. After all, the idea was to 'be buried in his ancestral tomb' - which is not really a fair description of what's going to happen, under present circumstances.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Being turned into an undead creature prevents Resurrection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm) from working. That is the core D&D rule.

The soul being trapped is a logical explanation of why that is the rule.

The other possible explanation is that the soul is corrupted, not trapped. The purpose of #946 is to put that theory to rest.
In vanilla D&D you can kill someone, use Soul Bind, turn the corpse into a Mummy or something with Create Undead, and the soul stays in the gem.

Of course, it didn't take 1d4 days after burial for Durkon to rise as a vampire, so this isn't vanilla D&D.

[DaveMcW]

In vanilla D&D you can kill someone, use Soul Bind, turn the corpse into a Mummy or something with Create Undead, and the soul stays in the gem.

You can do that in OOTS too.
Xykon did it to Lirian.
You would probably need to destroy both the gem and the Mummy to resurrect them.

Vampires are an exception, since they need access to the victim's memories.