Summon Greater Demon + Dybbuk = Potentially Better Animate Dead

[LichPlease]

Not sure if anyone else has posted about this, but for those Necromancers out there that aren't thrilled about Animate Dead and lower levels of Create Undead, consider using Summer Greater Demon to summon this new demon from MToF:

DYBBUK
Medium fiend (demon), chaotic evil
Armor Class 14
Hit Points 37 (5d8 + 15)
Speed 0 ft., 40 ft. (hover)
STR 6 (-2) DEX 19 (+4) CON 16 (+3) INT 16 (+3) WIS 15 (+2) CHA 14 (+2)
Skills Deception +6, Intimidation +4, Perception +4
Damage Resistances acid, cold, fire, lightning, thunder; bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from nonmagical attacks
Damage Immunities poison
Condition Immunities charmed, exhaustion, frightened, grappled, paralyzed, petrified, poisoned, prone, restrained
Senses darkvision 120 ft., passive Perception 14
Languages Abyssal, Common, telepathy 120 ft.
Challenge 4 (1,100 XP)

Incorporeal Movement. The dybbuk can move through other creatures and objects as if they were difficult terrain. It takes 5 (1d10) force damage if it ends its turn inside an object.

Innate Spellcasting. The dybbuk's innate spellcasting ability is Charisma (spell save DC 12). It can innately cast the following spells, requiring no material components:

At will: dimension door 3/day each: fear, phantasmal force

Magic Resistance. The dybbuk has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects.

Violate Corpse. The dybbuk can use a bonus action while it is possessing a corpse to make it do something unnatural, such as vomit blood, twist its head all the way around, or cause a quadruped to move as a biped. Any beast or humanoid that sees this behavior must succeed on a DC 12 Wisdom saving throw or become frightened of the dybbuk for 1 minute. The frightened creature can repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success. A creature that succeeds on a saving throw against this ability is immune to Violate Corpse for 24 hours.

ACTION
Tendril. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 13 (2d8 + 4) necrotic damage. If the target is a creature, its hit point maximum is also reduced by 3 (1d6). This reduction lasts until the target finishes a short or long rest. The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0.

Possess Corpse (Recharge 6). The dybbuk disappears into an intact corpse it can see within 5 feet of it. The corpse must be Large or smaller and be that of a beast or a humanoid. The dybbuk is now effectively the possessed creature. Its type becomes undead, though it now looks alive, and it gains a number of temporary hit points equal to the corpse's hit point maximum in life. While possessing the corpse, the dybbuk retains its hit points, alignment, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, telepathy, and immunity to poison damage, exhaustion, and being charmed and frightened. It otherwise uses the possessed target's game statistics, gaining access to its knowledge and proficiencies but not its class features, if any. The possession lasts until the temporary hit points are lost (at which point the body becomes a corpse once more) or the dybbuk ends its possession using a bonus action. When the possession ends, the dybbuk reappears in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the corpse.


Of course, you have to hope you are capable of maintaining control of the demon, but of course there going to be a price for more power.

[Unoriginal]

Summon Greater Demon only last 1 hour, and that'd only happen if the Demon somehow fails the 600 rolls it can have in that time.

Animate Dead is much, much better most of the time.

[JackPhoenix]

Just because the demon can walk around wearing a meatsuit doesn't mean it's necromancy in any way.

Compared to Animate Dead, it's still higher level slot, for much shorter duration, and while the resulting crime against nature is stronger than your average zombie, there's no big difference to summoning any other demon. And for CR4 creature, it's incredibly squishy.

[LichPlease]

Summon Greater Demon only last 1 hour, and that'd only happen if the Demon somehow fails the 600 rolls it can have in that time.

Animate Dead is much, much better most of the time.

The problem with Animate Dead is that if you want it to be more effective, you have to create more and more zombies/skeletons and that can quickly bog down the game. The duration may only be an hour but as long as the corpse remains in tact, you can take the corpse with you (Bag of Holding if necessary) and summon the Dybbuk later when needed. The only limit on what kind of corpse the Dybbuk possesses is that it has to be a large or smaller humanoid or beast. As far as I can tell, the only abilities you will be losing are spell casting as no other NPC abilities seem to be considered class abilities. Yes, it is risky to summon such a demon and maybe inefficient but there are plenty of times where I'd rather have one high quality undead than a ton of low quality undead that clog up the board. A nice additional bonus is it can help signify the dangers of tampering with forces that create undead because, yes, if it's not dead by the end of combat, you will need to be dealing with it afterward for sure. Now I'm enjoying the idea of needing a cage to hold the possessed corpse before losing control of the Dybbuk and other difficulties.

[LichPlease]

Just because the demon can walk around wearing a meatsuit doesn't mean it's necromancy in any way.

Compared to Animate Dead, it's still higher level slot, for much shorter duration, and while the resulting crime against nature is stronger than your average zombie, there's no big difference to summoning any other demon. And for CR4 creature, it's incredibly squishy.

The point was to give another, and potentially better, option for creating undead as an alternative to Animate Dead and lower levels of Create Undead. It's only one spell level higher than Animate Dead so I would say it is worth it in the right situation which shouldn't be too difficult to come across. Also, I don't think a Necromancer is going to fuss much over what school or technique is required to get him his undead minions as long as the results are the same, no matter how reckless the method.

[MaxWilson]

The problem with Animate Dead is that if you want it to be more effective, you have to create more and more zombies/skeletons and that can quickly bog down the game. The duration may only be an hour but as long as the corpse remains in tact, you can take the corpse with you (Bag of Holding if necessary) and summon the Dybbuk later when needed. The only limit on what kind of corpse the Dybbuk possesses is that it has to be a large or smaller humanoid or beast. As far as I can tell, the only abilities you will be losing are spell casting as no other NPC abilities seem to be considered class abilities. Yes, it is risky to summon such a demon and maybe inefficient but there are plenty of times where I'd rather have one high quality undead than a ton of low quality undead that clog up the board. A nice additional bonus is it can help signify the dangers of tampering with forces that create undead because, yes, if it's not dead by the end of combat, you will need to be dealing with it afterward for sure. Now I'm enjoying the idea of needing a cage to hold the possessed corpse before losing control of the Dybbuk and other difficulties.

Sure, this is a trick worth having in your bag of tricks (especially combined with Planar Binding). Is it "better" than Animate Dead + Undead Thralls? In some ways yes, in some ways no. It's not really worth arguing with posters who are trying to tell you that this trick is/isn't "better" than Animate Dead. Learn them both and use them where appropriate. Thanks for pointing out the potential synergy.

Personally I would probably have described this more as "a kind-of-better Magic Jar." Dybbuk + Planar Binding + Gloomweaver or Werebear corpse = win? You don't get the Gloomweaver's class abilities like warlock spells but you do apparently get to impose disadvantage on saves, and do enormous damage with a Shadow Spear. And unlike Magic Jar you're not putting your own neck on the line. The corpse of a Berserker Barbarian would also be great, since the Dybbuk is immune to exhaustion.

Anyway, the point here is that the Dybbuk punches out of its weight class for a CR 4 creature, if you give it a suitable corpse.

P.S. Note further that unlike an Intellect Devourer, the Dybbuk can't really heal in its possessed form, since healing spells don't restore temp HP. However, it does appear that the Dybbuk can simply exit the corpse and re-possess it in order to regain "full" temp HP. This is probably not intended.

P.P.S. Don't overlook that the Dybbuk gains access to the dead creature's knowledge. It's a better version of Speak With Dead that also lets you have the Dybbuk impersonate the dead creature to its erstwhile comrades. Infiltration possibilities abound.

[JackPhoenix]

The point was to give another, and potentially better, option for creating undead as an alternative to Animate Dead and lower levels of Create Undead. It's only one spell level higher than Animate Dead so I would say it is worth it in the right situation which shouldn't be too difficult to come across. Also, I don't think a Necromancer is going to fuss much over what school or technique is required to get him his undead minions as long as the results are the same, no matter how reckless the method.

It's not really an undead minion, though. It's still a demon. One that can possess corpse, but ultimately not any different from more effective demons you could get through the same spell.

[LichPlease]

It's not really an undead minion, though. It's still a demon. One that can possess corpse, but ultimately not any different from more effective demons you could get through the same spell.

Is says that once it possesses a corpse, it's type becomes undead. Your argument is similar to saying, "A zombie isn't undead, it's just negative energy animating a corpse." You could argue that that is just a mechanic but then if that stops being a true undead but then it may start to become a slippery slope that begins to trivialize other creature types.

This brings up another point that I was wondering about. Say you kill an already undead humanoid/beast. Is the corpse considered undead or humanoid/beast?

[JackPhoenix]

Is says that once it possesses a corpse, it's type becomes undead. Your argument is similar to saying, "A zombie isn't undead, it's just negative energy animating a corpse." You could argue that that is just a mechanic but then if that stops being a true undead but then it may start to become a slippery slope that begins to trivialize other creature types.

Undead are powered by negative energy... that's the definition...and generally self-sufficient. While dybbuk temporarily give himself (and the now walking corpse) undead subtype, the moment he leaves, the corpse drops to the ground as it was before (well, likely more damaged). It's not that different from normal demonic, ghostly or intellect devourer-y possession.


This brings up another point that I was wondering about. Say you kill an already undead humanoid/beast. Is the corpse considered undead or humanoid/beast?

Undead. I'm not going to bother finding relevant SA tweents, but they are out there somewhere.

[Unoriginal]

This brings up another point that I was wondering about. Say you kill an already undead humanoid/beast. Is the corpse considered undead or humanoid/beast?

The corpse is considered undead. That's why most resurrection magic won't bring back someone whose corpse was turned into an undead.



The problem with Animate Dead is that if you want it to be more effective, you have to create more and more zombies/skeletons and that can quickly bog down the game. The duration may only be an hour but as long as the corpse remains in tact, you can take the corpse with you (Bag of Holding if necessary) and summon the Dybbuk later when needed. The only limit on what kind of corpse the Dybbuk possesses is that it has to be a large or smaller humanoid or beast. As far as I can tell, the only abilities you will be losing are spell casting as no other NPC abilities seem to be considered class abilities. Yes, it is risky to summon such a demon and maybe inefficient but there are plenty of times where I'd rather have one high quality undead than a ton of low quality undead that clog up the board. A nice additional bonus is it can help signify the dangers of tampering with forces that create undead because, yes, if it's not dead by the end of combat, you will need to be dealing with it afterward for sure. Now I'm enjoying the idea of needing a cage to hold the possessed corpse before losing control of the Dybbuk and other difficulties.

You trade a large groups of minions for 1 minion you can't control well.

If you need one strong minion and don't care about collateral damage (including on yourself), it's a spell to have. But I don't see how its benefits exceed using Animate Dead in the large majority of Necromancer businesses.

[LichPlease]

Undead are powered by negative energy... that's the definition...and generally self-sufficient. While dybbuk temporarily give himself (and the now walking corpse) undead subtype, the moment he leaves, the corpse drops to the ground as it was before (well, likely more damaged). It's not that different from normal demonic, ghostly or intellect devourer-y possession.

It does not explicitly state how the Dybbuk controls the corpse, but if it is possession as per spells like Magic Jar and Pathfinder's Possession, then the animated body has at least now been raised by practices of the school of necromancy, contradicting your very first point. I find it odd that the writers would even bother stating that the possessed corpse was undead, if it were not meant to be undead, and instead a construct such as a Flesh Golem.

[LichPlease]

The corpse is considered undead. That's why most resurrection magic won't bring back someone whose corpse was turned into an undead.

Thank you. I think that example is good enough reasoning.



You trade a large groups of minions for 1 minion you can't control well.

If you need one strong minion and don't care about collateral damage (including on yourself), it's a spell to have. But I don't see how its benefits exceed using Animate Dead in the large majority of Necromancer businesses.

Like I said, a lot of the time, a large group of undead is harder to manage and slows the game down. One higher quality undead, though potentially unreliable and threatening, reduces the issue of managing a horde and adds the role playing fun (fun to some at least) of dealing with the collateral damage of summoned demon.

[JackPhoenix]

It does not explicitly state how the Dybbuk controls the corpse, but if it is possession as per spells like Magic Jar and Pathfinder's Possession, then the animated body has at least now been raised by practices of the school of necromancy, contradicting your very first point. I find it odd that the writers would even bother stating that the possessed corpse was undead, if it were not meant to be undead, and instead a construct such as a Flesh Golem.

There's no spell involved. It's the demon's ability. The demon possess the corpse and controls it. Every relevant information is in the dybbuk's stat block. The change of type is there presumably for mechanical interactions (if the dybbuk kepts its own type, or the original creature type of the corpse, he could be, for example, healed, or affected by things that work against fiends like Planar Binding or some kinds of Magic Circle).

[LichPlease]

There's no spell involved. It's the demon's ability. The demon possess the corpse and controls it. Every relevant information is in the dybbuk's stat block. The change of type is there presumably for mechanical interactions (if the dybbuk kepts its own type, or the original creature type of the corpse, he could be, for example, healed, or affected by things that work against fiends like Planar Binding or some kinds of Magic Circle).

The possession being made either by spell or ability is irrelevant. A Wight's ability to turn slain foes into Zombies is not a spell but would still be a necromantic effect that creates undead. If not, then by your logic, it is not similar enough to Animate Dead/Finger of Death to justify the Wight's newly created Zombie as more authentically undead than the corpse possessed by the Dybbuk. As for the creature type selected for mechanical interactions, a construct is unaffected by all of those types of spells as well, if not more.

[JackPhoenix]

The possession being made either by spell or ability is irrelevant. A Wight's ability to turn slain foes into Zombies is not a spell but would still be a necromantic effect that creates undead. If not, then by your logic, it is not similar enough to Animate Dead/Finger of Death to justify the Wight's newly created Zombie as more authentically undead than the corpse possessed by the Dybbuk. As for the creature type selected for mechanical interactions, a construct is unaffected by all of those types of spells as well, if not more.

You were the one who claimed that the dybbuk's meatsuit is "raised by practices of the school of necromancy". I merely pointed out that's not true. There's no spell, and thus no school of magic, involved anywhere in the dybbuk's ability. Neither is the corpse a distinct creature powered by negative energy, i.e. true undead, like wight's zombie spawn are. It's the dybbuk, a demon, using the corpse as a vessel. That involves using some of the stats of the demon, some of the stats of the creature the corpse was before death, and some changes on top (temporary HP and the change in creature type). It is similar to other forms of possession (ghosts and Magic Jar), but all of them have their differences, like the later two not working on objects, which may be the reason for the change of type.

The type change actually creates a mechanical problem. If you turn a humanoid into a zombie, the zombie gets destroyed, and you use Revivify on the corpse, you'll get back a zombie. If you use Revivify on the corpse that was temporarily possesed by dybbuk (assuming you're in the time limit), what do you get? Not the dybbuk, as it's potentially still alive, and you can't recreate its influence over the corpse out of nowhere. Not the original humanoid or beast, because the corpse now belongs to an undead, apparently, despite the little problem that the creature may potentially never "died" as an undead, the dybbuk could merely left the corpse. So... what the hell happens?

[LichPlease]

You were the one who claimed that the dybbuk's meatsuit is "raised by practices of the school of necromancy". I merely pointed out that's not true. There's no spell, and thus no school of magic, involved anywhere in the dybbuk's ability. Neither is the corpse a distinct creature powered by negative energy, i.e. true undead, like wight's zombie spawn are. It's the dybbuk, a demon, using the corpse as a vessel. That involves using some of the stats of the demon, some of the stats of the creature the corpse was before death, and some changes on top (temporary HP and the change in creature type). It is similar to other forms of possession (ghosts and Magic Jar), but all of them have their differences, like the later two not working on objects, which may be the reason for the change of type.

My point, using the Wight's Life Drain ability versus Finger of Death as an example, was that whether an effect comes in the form of a spell or an ability, it is still the same effect in either case. I will admit, these are not identical effects. However, Life Drain is similar enough that if such ability was to be made into a spell, it would be very surprising if that spell did not belong to the school of necromancy. The Possess Corpse parallels Magic Jar/Possession similarly. In fact, a spell based directly on Possess Corpse would be justified to belong to the school of necromancy even more so, as neither Magic Jar nor Possession changes the possessor's type to undead, nor do they have the capacity to animate the dead via possession.


The type change actually creates a mechanical problem. If you turn a humanoid into a zombie, the zombie gets destroyed, and you use Revivify on the corpse, you'll get back a zombie. If you use Revivify on the corpse that was temporarily possesed by dybbuk (assuming you're in the time limit), what do you get? Not the dybbuk, as it's potentially still alive, and you can't recreate its influence over the corpse out of nowhere. Not the original humanoid or beast, because the corpse now belongs to an undead, apparently, despite the little problem that the creature may potentially never "died" as an undead, the dybbuk could merely left the corpse. So... what the hell happens?

That is very odd that Revivify can affect undead in the first place. And you make a good point about if the corpse was somehow still able to be Revivified, it would likely come back to life and not unlife, as the Dybbuk was the undead one. However, with the creature type change, it would make more sense for the corpse to become the undead of the two. This raises the question even more though about what actually makes an undead. Yes, most corporeal undead are animated by negative energy, but there are some incorporeal undead that can be good aligned and I don't see how they could be any sort of manifestation of negative energy. If a corporeal undead "dies", is it just broken beyond functioning, or has the negative energy left just it? And if the negative energy has left it, what is the reasoning for why it cannot be resurrected via Resurrection?

Anyway, I concede that this is not exactly animating the dead in the more traditional sense, but I still stand by that this particular use of Summon Greater Demon would be attractive for necromancers as many necromancers have been known to seek aid from other demons, particularly Orcus. I would not be surprised if the Dybbuk wasn't a common denizen of Orcus's realm.

[LichPlease]

In addition to all the "it's not really undead" stuff pertaining to this thread - which is perfectly fine, play the game as you want - the Dybbuk in Pathfinder is naturally an undead, so use that knowledge as you see fit. That's just for those who don't mind mixing their Pathfinder and D&D.

[JackPhoenix]

That is very odd that Revivify can affect undead in the first place. And you make a good point about if the corpse was somehow still able to be Revivified, it would likely come back to life and not unlife, as the Dybbuk was the undead one. However, with the creature type change, it would make more sense for the corpse to become the undead of the two. This raises the question even more though about what actually makes an undead. Yes, most corporeal undead are animated by negative energy, but there are some incorporeal undead that can be good aligned and I don't see how they could be any sort of manifestation of negative energy. If a corporeal undead "dies", is it just broken beyond functioning, or has the negative energy left just it? And if the negative energy has left it, what is the reasoning for why it cannot be resurrected via Resurrection?

As there are no deathless in 5e (yet), *all* undead, corporeal or otherwise, are animated by negative energy... well, except the dybbuk's meatsuit. Maybe. Negative energy itself doesn't have alignment, so there's no reason why it should prevent ghosts (and other undead) from having good alignment. It's just that most undead hate the living, parasite on them for their own benefit, or just have murderous urges, thus fitting under evil alignment.

[LichPlease]

As there are no deathless in 5e (yet), *all* undead, corporeal or otherwise, are animated by negative energy... well, except the dybbuk's meatsuit. Maybe. Negative energy itself doesn't have alignment, so there's no reason why it should prevent ghosts (and other undead) from having good alignment. It's just that most undead hate the living, parasite on them for their own benefit, or just have murderous urges, thus fitting under evil alignment.

Ah, ok. I though negative energy was concentrated evil.

[Draken]

Negative Energy being the animating force of the undead is not really standard canon for 5th Ed, far as I can see. The Monster Manual's description of the undead goes:


Undead are once-living creatures brought to a horrifying state of undeath through the practice of necromantic magic or some unholy curse. Undead include walking corpses, such as vampires and zombies, as well as bodiless spirits, such as ghosts and specters.

Even more tellingly, several undead are no longer immune to Necrotic damage (skeletons and zombies are not even resistant to it).

What moves the undead is really up in the air at this point. Specially since healing magic doesn't harm them either anymore, and similarly, spells like Inflict Wounds and Harm (which is a disease now? First time I noticed that) don't heal them either.

[Unoriginal]

Several kinds of undead are described as negative energy spirits inhabiting a corpse. Not all of them are like that, though.

[Unoriginal]

In addition to all the "it's not really undead" stuff pertaining to this thread - which is perfectly fine, play the game as you want - the Dybbuk in Pathfinder is naturally an undead, so use that knowledge as you see fit. That's just for those who don't mind mixing their Pathfinder and D&D.

Pathfinder has no relevance to D&D. It's like saying "well in Mutants & Masterminds this monster is a ghost".