How far can a Resurrection rebuild a character?

[ironkid]

What the title says.

If the party finds a random skull or piece of bone, can a resurrection spell build the missing parts? (which in this case would be "almost all")

Any feedback would be welcome!

[Mellack]

It says it restores any missing body parts, so I would take that to mean it builds anything you do not have. Note there are many restrictions on who it can return to life.

[Quoz]

Ultimately, it is up to the GM what is narratively viable.

Obviously if you need resurrection instead of raise dead, its because more time has passes and less body is intact. It would probably work on a skeleton or mummified corpse without issue, even if missing a limb or 3. For no body whatsoever you need true resurrection. Resurrection falls in between.

The edge cases come in the little bits. Go with what fits the story. If a cult leader was killed, dismembered, and his body pieces sent to the far corners of the kingdom, then you probably need to make an effort to track down multiple pieces. If a PC can't get out with the body of a dead party member, they can probably get away with just bringing the head back to the party cleric.

[Amnestic]

Depends on how your DM rules "dead creature" I think.

Is a piece of skull enough to count as a "dead creature"? If yes, it would rebuild them entirely by RAW. If no, then the spell fizzles. Personally I would rule 'no', it's insufficient as a target. I don't know where my arbitrary cut off point for how much of it needs to be intact for the spell to work is, but it's more than that.

Probably more than just a single limb or head too.

[Segev]

If the party finds a random skull or piece of bone, can a resurrection spell build the missing parts? (which in this case would be "almost all")

Provided the skull is from a corpse of a creature that died within the time limits of resurrection, yes. You could do it with just a skull fragment, in fact. I think "a finger" is the smallest thing suggested in the rules text; I'd allow you to do it with as little as a knucklebone, myself. Or a lock of hair.

[Silly Name]

Depends on how your DM rules "dead creature" I think.

Is a piece of skull enough to count as a "dead creature"? If yes, it would rebuild them entirely by RAW. If no, then the spell fizzles. Personally I would rule 'no', it's insufficient as a target. I don't know where my arbitrary cut off point for how much of it needs to be intact for the spell to work is, but it's more than that.

Probably more than just a single limb or head too.

I think a limb or an head/skull would be acceptable targets in my games. A single vertebra or a vial of blood is however unlikely to work.

I'm pretty sure this could be an in-universe philosophical problem...

[Lord Vukodlak]

Traditionally resurrection worked so long as you had any remains of the subject from time of death. So a PC burned to ash or dust would qualify.
5e has arguably tighten the restrictions and it appears there must be enough of the body to still qualify as a corpse.

[Segev]

I think a limb or an head/skull would be acceptable targets in my games. A single vertebra or a vial of blood is however unlikely to work.

I'm pretty sure this could be an in-universe philosophical problem...

Personally, as long as there's enough to make a clone with (were it taken from a living subject), or to scry out a living subject, I'd allow resurrection to work.

The limitation on resurrection that you must have part of the body is simply to prevent you from arbitrarily naming anybody you like to bring back. You need to have something of them you retrieved from their corpse.



Though now I'm imagining a Yakuza-like gang that has deep ties to a dark cult whose reason for chopping off one finger is so that they can archive them for purposes of resurrection after their operatives die, assuming the operative is considered valuable enough.

[OldTrees1]

Since the spell description of Resurrection is as broad as True Resurrection, I think you need context clues from sources like disintegration.


A disintegrated creature and everything it is wearing and carrying, except magic items, are reduced to a pile of fine gray dust. The creature can be restored to life only by means of a true resurrection or a wish spell.

Was the cause of death as severe as disintegration? Yes -> True Resurrection. No -> Resurrection.

[Chronos]

In at least some versions of the spell, the part must have been part of the body at the time of death. So no archiving of fingers before an agent sets out on a mission.

[NorthernPhoenix]

I'd say yes for parts that thematically represent the core of a being (i.e skull, heart, etc) but no for what i would classify as "random bits". To me, the magic cares more about conceptual truths than literal ones.

[Segev]

I'd say yes for parts that thematically represent the core of a being (i.e skull, heart, etc) but no for what i would classify as "random bits". To me, the magic cares more about conceptual truths than literal ones.

That seems counter to the spell's own text, ... ::reads the text::

Huh, seems I was remembering 3e's wording.

5e's version says you "touch a corpse" and that it closes all wounds and restores all missing body parts.

I guess it is a DM judgment call just how much of the body must be present for it to count as "a corpse" rather than "a body part."

[Mr Adventurer]

In the case of the Disintegrate spell in particular, I think I would rule that Resurrection doesn't have anything to work with - not because the body has been reduced to dust, but because it's been transmuted...

[Xetheral]

In at least some versions of the spell, the part must have been part of the body at the time of death. So no archiving of fingers before an agent sets out on a mission.

That restriction was removed in 5e. At tables where a finger or toe is ruled a sufficient target for Ressurection, storing one with your local temple and pre-paying for Ressurrection on a scheduled date (that you can update as necessary) is a wise adventuring precaution.

[Segev]

That restriction was removed in 5e. At tables where a finger or toe is ruled a sufficient target for Ressurection, storing one with your local temple and pre-paying for Ressurrection on a scheduled date (that you can update as necessary) is a wise adventuring precaution.

While I'd have no problem with a table ruling as described here, I will, in the name of pedantry, point out that an argument can be made that "a finger" is not "a corpse." What constitutes "a corpse" is sort of the problem of the heap, though.

[Xetheral]

While I'd have no problem with a table ruling as described here, I will, in the name of pedantry, point out that an argument can be made that "a finger" is not "a corpse." What constitutes "a corpse" is sort of the problem of the heap, though.

I agree. It will vary from table to table.

[Lord Vukodlak]

So I thought about this awhile and how much of a body would be required for me to say "that's a corpse"

If all the limbs are missing i'd call it a "limbless corpse" so you don't need any of the limbs or the head. So I'd say two-thirds of the torso minimum or one third of the torso if the head is still attached.

But honestly I think I'll just throw out the 5e target definitions and default to the ones used in 3.5. Resurrection requires any remains taken from the time of death. I also don't want a 9th level spell to be required to bring back a PC after a nasty Beholder fight.

[Thunderous Mojo]

If the party finds a random skull or piece of bone, can a resurrection spell build the missing parts? (which in this case would be "almost all")


"We can rebuild him. We have the technology. We can make him better than he was"..........not only does it only take a little piece of the body, but you are cured of diseases.

Had Polio in your first life? Not anymore!

[Devils_Advocate]

Well, if someone cut my finger off, but I'm still alive, that finger is hardly even part of a dead creature, is it? It's a former part of a living creature. And if I subsequently die, that finger still was never part of my dead body.

Conversely, touching part of a dead body needs to count as touching the body in order for the spell to work at all, because that's all anyone can manage anyway. Touching any macroscopic thing is always only touching part of it; you'll never be in contact with all of the matter in the object at once!

That's logic.

Thus I conclude with absolute crushing certainty that the same considerations apply as did in 3rd Edition. Cast the spell on something that was part of the creature's body when it died. That's casting the spell on the dead creature.

PRO TIP: Parts of a creature from when it was still living are still useful for unambiguously identifying the target of True Resurrection. In an unfathomably vast multiverse, there are probably lots of beings with the same name, but someone's nail clippings only came off of one person. Yeah, you could try to describe someone in terms of more abstract relationships to things at hand (also not identifying those things by name in order to avoid the same problem), but it's hard to beat the good old-fashioned Principle of Contagion.

[MaxWilson]

That seems counter to the spell's own text, ... ::reads the text::

Huh, seems I was remembering 3e's wording.

5e's version says you "touch a corpse" and that it closes all wounds and restores all missing body parts.

I guess it is a DM judgment call just how much of the body must be present for it to count as "a corpse" rather than "a body part."

Nitpick: it says "dead creature" not "a corpse", which is fortunate because corpses by definition can only be human, whereas in 5E you can resurrect anything non-undead, e.g. your Shield Guardian after it sadly expired defending your life, or the Ancient Silver Dragon who was killed by treachery at the start of the campaign, or a Radiant Idol from two levels ago which you'd like to Planar Bind. (Or the Eladrin crown prince you accidentally killed ten levels ago, accidentally kicking off a war between humans and Tuatha which the humans are currently losing.)

This is especially useful to remember once Wish comes online, so there is no gold cost for Resurrection. Plan ahead and save those dead creatures!

[Witty Username]

You need a physical piece of them, I don't think the spell specifies a size. I would cut off at smallest perceivable piece, for medieval fantasy maybe bone fragments or a lock of hair, if modern fantasy maybe a single cell to fit the trope.

You could have fun with the idea and make it vary from church to church, maybe Vecna can't bring people back from eyes and hands. Maybe Loth can only use blood but so much as a drop will do, maybe I will think of a good aligned god in the morning.

[Devils_Advocate]

To expand on my earlier analysis... A living creature that has lost part of its body is still alive, but the lost body part is not. That's what makes one piece of a hacked-up creature the creature and the other the former body part of a creature, right? There's a clear and straightforward distinction there.

So, if we accept that, then nothing is still part of a creature after it's killed, because there's no living piece left. Even calling the piece that was there at the time of death a "dead creature" is just a shorthand for convenience. A creature's remains aren't the creature itself. If there even is such a thing as the essential part of a creature, it's the soul. And while having to track someone down in the afterlife arguably should be required for a resurrection, that's probably not the intent here.

But the main point as I see it is that the spell explicitly restores any missing body parts, and saying that there's not enough of the body left for a resurrection goes against that. Any amount is enough.


corpses by definition can only be human
Don't do that. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoTiGNtG244)

If Nethack has taught me anything, it has taught me that corpses come from a wide variety of different creatures.