The relationship between human souls and decomposition

[Sharad9]

When a person dies, their soul doesn't ascend to the afterlife automatically. The soul build's a connection with its body while alive, and remains attached to that body in death. Through natural decomposition, the soul gradually loses its connection to the mortal realm. At some point, when the body decays enough,the soul ascends to the next life where it will be judged by god. It will either be allowed into heaven or join the reincarnation cycle to be reborn and given another chance.

The ascension of the soul however, is not always guaranteed. While it is trapped in the body after death, the soul is protected from supernatural forces. However, There are invisible predators that prey on and consume vulnerable souls. These are called wraiths, which are angry spirits that have been unable to ascend properly and remain trapped on the mortal realm. These spirits are in constant pain, and seek to take out their agony and misery on the living by killing them. They are also given to consume other lost souls and grow in power. This has been common enough throughout history to be a real concern.

This is why funwral rites and proper burials are held as sacred, because they guaranty passage into the next life. Priests are used to expedite the process of ascension. Through performing the necessary funeral rites and given a proper burial, they release the soul immediately and send it to be judged accordingly. These are rites only chosen priests can perform, which involve complex magical rituals that are learned through years of study. This has given the church a strong presence, and has made them a powerful force in humanity. Religion and faith play an important role in daily life of people, and priests are held in high regard in their community.

Otherwise interferening with a body (cremation, dismemberment, etc) is considered a great crime. If a body doesn't decay naturally, the soul may become more vulnerable to malignant forces. Necromancy is akin to heresy, because it enslaves a soul to a former body long after its time in this world has passed. The soul is in constant pain, unable to control its actions. Necromancy is punishable by an excruciating and humiliating death, as an act that involves enslaving the loved ones of people is met with hatred from society.

Individuals who go off to war are given a special place in society. Warriors are given markings by priests that are akin to magic tatoos. If they die in war, their souls ascend automatically without delay, so they can go into battle without fear. Being a soldier is a high honor, as is dying in war for your nation.

I'd like to know what people think. Your comments would be appreciated

[Anymage]

It does an okay job explaining why necromancy is bad instead of just making morally neutral negative energy robots. Although personally speaking, I like to include at least a smidge of 5e's "even when they're nominally under your control, they're still incredibly dangerous things that have to be kept on a very short leash". They're not just bad because they do icky things to souls, they're also prone to snacking on passersby if you get distracted.

The other big question, given how central priests are for funerary rites, is what your religious landscape looks like. If there's one overarching church, even if that church has schisms, cool. Ditto if there's "one church" that happens to be pantheist. (Like a Norse cleric who invoked Thor for blessings of strength, Odin for wisdom, etc. as opposed to separate clergies for Odin, for Thor, and for all the other gods individually.) If it's a D&D polytheist pastiche, making funerary rites the shtick of clerics doesn't seem that defining given how broadly different all the different religions already are. If that's the route you want to go, you may want to make a neutral death god where funerals are it's followers' shtick. Then you can play up both the perks of their neutrality (few people will turn them away, since nobody wants wraiths popping up), and the obligations (picking sides or taking advantage of their freedom of passage will encourage certain people to think that just leaving bodies to rot is the better choice.)

[redwizard007]

It does an okay job explaining why necromancy is bad instead of just making morally neutral negative energy robots. Although personally speaking, I like to include at least a smidge of 5e's "even when they're nominally under your control, they're still incredibly dangerous things that have to be kept on a very short leash". They're not just bad because they do icky things to souls, they're also prone to snacking on passersby if you get distracted.

The other big question, given how central priests are for funerary rites, is what your religious landscape looks like. If there's one overarching church, even if that church has schisms, cool. Ditto if there's "one church" that happens to be pantheist. (Like a Norse cleric who invoked Thor for blessings of strength, Odin for wisdom, etc. as opposed to separate clergies for Odin, for Thor, and for all the other gods individually.) If it's a D&D polytheist pastiche, making funerary rites the shtick of clerics doesn't seem that defining given how broadly different all the different religions already are. If that's the route you want to go, you may want to make a neutral death god where funerals are it's followers' shtick. Then you can play up both the perks of their neutrality (few people will turn them away, since nobody wants wraiths popping up), and the obligations (picking sides or taking advantage of their freedom of passage will encourage certain people to think that just leaving bodies to rot is the better choice.)

A few thoughts on the quotation before I get to the main topic...

Necrophilia much? Seriously, I'm concerned.

That aside, Anymage's whole second paragraph was pretty spot on. Monotheistic, or true pantheonic religions would handle this much better than the classic RPG mash of deities. UNLESS... Unless you use regional or racial cultural divides and have legitimately diverse cultural groups. The mixing you see in most published settings where folks respect one another's differences would get thrown aside in the rush to war.

It is a remarkably well thought out system of beliefs. I did have a few questions.

Is it going to be accurate?

Is there any way to confirm that what the priests tell us is the truth?

Are there heretics that believe otherwise?

If there are other races or cultures or religions, do they also believe this?

[Everyl]

Good stuff!

The big question I have that others haven't asked already is, why don't non-soldiers get the tattoos? If the goal is to keep wraiths from being spawned, wouldn't it make sense to take such preemptive measures for as many people as possible? I can see risk involved in anybody living outside of an easy day's travel of a chosen cleric, as it may be difficult to get a recent corpse to a cleric (or cleric to the corpse) in a timely manner.

[Sharad9]

Good stuff!

The big question I have that others haven't asked already is, why don't non-soldiers get the tattoos? If the goal is to keep wraiths from being spawned, wouldn't it make sense to take such preemptive measures for as many people as possible? I can see risk involved in anybody living outside of an easy day's travel of a chosen cleric, as it may be difficult to get a recent corpse to a cleric (or cleric to the corpse) in a timely manner.

I'm currently coming up with a good reason for that. The point is to make warriors and soldiers a special honored class that these tatoos are limited to, since they are meant to sacrifice their lives to defend their country. Perhaps due to divine will or something? I haven't figured it out yet.

[GorinichSerpant]

Good stuff!

The big question I have that others haven't asked already is, why don't non-soldiers get the tattoos? If the goal is to keep wraiths from being spawned, wouldn't it make sense to take such preemptive measures for as many people as possible? I can see risk involved in anybody living outside of an easy day's travel of a chosen cleric, as it may be difficult to get a recent corpse to a cleric (or cleric to the corpse) in a timely manner.


I'm currently coming up with a good reason for that. The point is to make warriors and soldiers a special honored class that these tatoos are limited to, since they are meant to sacrifice their lives to defend their country. Perhaps due to divine will or something? I haven't figured it out yet.

The tattoos on some level closer to death, or Death as the case maybe. For an honorable warrior this isn't that much of an issue as they are going to be close to death anyway, while for someone who wants to live peacefully it is a unpleasant idea. It also says interesting things about a character when a none solider has one of these tattoos or a soldier doesn't have them.

[Gnarlymuppet]

Tattoos function effectively as Christian baptism. Cool. Very visible means of defining a warrior caste (or ex warriors for that matter - would they be removed? Overwritten?)

I am really interested in this idea of a post-mortal food chain. Wraiths that flock to corpses like crows makes for a friggin' metal image. Is there a wraith life cycle? If they eat enough souls, do they graduate to animating skeletons or zombies? (I'll be using that myself, actually)

Sounds good. More info on the religion would be great.