AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

OK. Let's say I die, and I OOCly give permission to completely and utterly destroy my char's corpse and any and all belongings on it.

Will I then need a DM-overseen True Resurrection spell to continue playing? Or can I just come back?

(Obviously, this is to the DMs, but anyone else can add their 2pence if they want)

Burning a corpse still leaves remains, even if those remains are nothing but ashes so you don't actually need a True Resurrection unless no one can find the remains.
I'm not sure but maybe divination would be able to help you find them.

Note the remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell bit:

The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death. (The remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell count as a small portion of its body.) The creature can have been dead no longer than 10 years per caster level.

And the effect of Disintegrate:

A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 40d6). Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected.

To the best of my knowledge, yes and no. Yes, you should have no other means of returning. In the spirit of good RP and common sense, you shouldn't come back without very good reason. No, there are no rules that can enforce this unless you specifically made a deal with DMs involved. Gentlemen's (or women's) agreements can't unfortunately be supervised. But if you made the admirable decision to allow this in the first place, and unless you have a split personality thing going for you, I doubt there's any reason to regret and weasel out of it.

As for the ashes, I'm not sure how you'd plan to find and identify somebody's remains after a Disintegrate or cremation. Divination might help, but it would be a complex process needing several spells. First you'd have to locate the general idea and then somehow narrow down the specific place and even the particular particles of dust. I doubt you can just aim the spell in the general direction of a pile containing a few bits of human ashes and hope to Resurrect the guy you're looking for (as opposed to one of the myriad of dead insects, bacteria, and probably mammals who've left bits and pieces behind in that same pile). So I doubt you'd even have to hide the remains that well, as long as you just spread them around the ground and mix them with the soil. I suppose it's generally assumed that Resurrection after Disintegrate is performed either on the undisturbed pile left behind or whatever container your fellow adventurers put you in, not on somebody who's been cremated with the spell and tossed into the four winds.

True Res requires a DM. Period.

Um I have a question, could an NPC Cleric cast True Resurrection for someone? Like someone at the Salandran Temple?
Would need a DM present obviously.

Obviously the DMs are going to set whatever safeguards they need, but as far as game mechanics is concerned, True Resurrection brings you back without need for a body, although your gear is... toast.

TormakSaber wrote:

True Res requires a DM. Period.

Not to be pedantic but how does this factor into Outsider PCs, who have to be True Resurrected to be raised?

Is that a gloss-over type thing, or...?

3.5 changed most PC outsider races (i.e. tiefling, genasi, aasimar) into Outsiders (Native). That fancy little subclass of Outsiders can be raised by normal means.

That said: My quote remains exactly the same. Required. Period.

Uh. But we're 3.0, aren't we?

Frak me, I'm going for it. Okay - if we're assuming all Outsider PCs are Native Outsiders, thus can be Raised normally; 1.) does this mean we have to special request an Outsider PC be a non-native Outsider and 2.) if Outsider PCs are all Outsider (Native) by default, then why are they subject to being Banished when they are not Extraplanar on their native plane?

Amia is 3.5, or as close to it as can be made with NWN and other issues which I may or may not be aware of as a normal player.

LetumLux wrote:

Uh. But we're 3.0, aren't we?

Frak me, I'm going for it. Okay - if we're assuming all Outsider PCs are Native Outsiders, thus can be Raised normally; 1.) does this mean we have to special request an Outsider PC be a non-native Outsider and 2.) if Outsider PCs are all Outsider (Native) by default, then why are they subject to being Banished when they are not Extraplanar on their native plane?

No, we are our own mix of whatever we feel like using. Largely 3.5 when it comes to it, especially for PNP.

And sigh, more questions that have already been answered in the past.

1: Is it on the Amia race list as something you can play without request? No? Then yes, you need to request it. Literally listed in rules and lore.

2: Because it does. You're still an outsider. You're Banished. To Death.

TormakSaber wrote:

2: Because it does. You're still an outsider. You're Banished. To Death.

I understand that's how the mechanics (of this D&D esque game) work, but that literally doesn't make any sense. You're either a native outsider, or you aren't.

You should just say "That's the way the game mechanics work so we have to roll with it in game," rather than trying to defend something that doesn't make sense.

Uh, that is what I just said. It kills you because it does. Because you're an outsider and it kills you.

Native Outsiders are still counted as Outsiders for being affected negatively by spells, you know. The subype is specifically for the use of raising, to stop 20+ monks, genasi, aasimar, tieflings, etc, from needing True Resses only to be raised.

TormakSaber wrote:

No, we are our own mix of whatever we feel like using. Largely 3.5 when it comes to it, especially for PNP.

Okay.

TormakSaber wrote:

1: Is it on the Amia race list as something you can play without request? No? Then yes, you need to request it. Literally listed in rules and lore.

Outsiders that are planetouched (Genasi, etc) are on the list and it doesn't specify that they must be native outsiders. I'm pretty sure there's a number of them out there that are from a different Plane because this isn't explicit.

Subraces wrote:

Air Genasi are the descendants of Djinn or Air Elementals, along with other planar creatures of air. Faerûnian Air Genasi tend to come from Calimshan, where the Djinn once ruled. Others often come from the Plane of Air out of a desire to explore.

Subraces wrote:

Fire Genasi hail from the Elemental Plane of Fire, typically, or are conceived or descended from a creature that relates to the Elemental Plane of Fire. Fire Elementals, Efreet, and more are capable of producing Fire Genasi spawn. Fire Genasi native to Toril often originate from Calimshan, where Efreet once ruled.

Subraces wrote:

Water Genasi hail from the Plane of Water. Marids (Water Genies), and Water Elementals, are the two most common sources for Water Genasi. Most Water Genasi on Faerûn are born in the regions around the Sea of Fallen Stars.

The following races require DM permission to be played wrote:

¤ Any extraplanar creature, other than those available through the Subrace system (Githzerai, mephling etc.)

I'm just saying that if this is the way it is, that is fine, but the information provided should really reflect that, because the Subraces entries suggest we can freely play non-native Outsiders that are Aasimar, Tieflings and Genasi. If we're going to get bit in the ass with this later because it isn't absolutely clear (and it isn't) then it should be made explicit. That's typically why questions are asked - because we need clarification, because it isn't already clear.

Most of these misconceptions aren't appearing out of thin air, it's because the rules and lore provided is misleading, contradictory, or otherwise not cohesive and can benefit from streamlining to prevent a lot of these confusions in the future.

(Also, the "Read more about character applications here" in the Subraces page is broken.)

TormakSaber wrote:

Uh, that is what I just said. It kills you because it does. Because you're an outsider and it kills you.

Native Outsiders are still counted as Outsiders for being affected negatively by spells, you know. The subype is specifically for the use of raising, to stop 20+ monks, genasi, aasimar, tieflings, etc, from needing True Resses only to be raised.

The point of Banishment and Dismissal isn't to "kill" outsiders, it's to return them to their native plane.

Creatures with this subtype are native to the Material Plane (hence the subtype’s name).

Since Native Outsiders don't go anywhere when they're banished, it doesn't make sense that Banishment kills them (suspending disbelief that Banishment is for killing, here).

Yes, I know TR requires DM oversight. What I'm asking is, if I give OOC permission for my character's corpse to be /obliterated/, either by fire, or magic, or Dragon throat, will I have to have that TR to play that char again? Or can I just brush it off and do whatever?

Mind you, I only mean /if OOC consent is given/.

(I request to have the stuff that is specifically about Outsiders as it relates to Banishment and True Resurrection out of this thread and made into it's own, with apologies to Axl.)

Honestly it's up to you I think, there's nothing that says if you give OOC consent to something that you have to abide by it. It's about the same as breaking a promise.

Course if a DM happens along..

Quote:

I'm just saying that if this is the way it is, that is fine, but the information provided should really reflect that, because the Subraces entries suggest we can freely play non-native Outsiders that are Aasimar, Tieflings and Genasi. If we're going to get bit in the ass with this later because it isn't absolutely clear (and it isn't) then it should be made explicit. That's typically why questions are asked - because we need clarification, because it isn't already clear.

All Aasimar, Tieflings and Genasi are Outsider (Native). I explicitly said this. Pay attention. Hell, your inseparable other half CoA even quotes the part of Outsider (Native) that explains this fact in detail.

Banishment kills because it does. I said this twice now. Pay attention.

I really really get tired of answering the same questions over and over and a lot of times to the same people. Yes, that is why I'm being snippy. Because you give the answers and it seems like no one is paying attention, or it's not the answer thy want, so they patently ignore it or continue on rambling with nitpicky details that 100% do not matter, because the answer was already given.

And I'm saying that it needs to be reflected in the lore and subraces pages, because people can't find one DM's ruling about it in a thread somewhere in GD. A DM says something in a thread, and it rarely gets put on the places you tell us to go look. So put it where you tell us to go look. What's the problem with that?

sorry, sort of faded off halfway through that tormy, were you saying something? oh and banishment doesnt kill does it?

>.>

I edited your post. You are lucky I don't forum ban you for posting work inappropriate material. Don't do it again.

TormakSaber wrote:

All Aasimar, Tieflings and Genasi are Outsider (Native). I explicitly said this. Pay attention. Hell, your inseparable other half CoA even quotes the part of Outsider (Native) that explains this fact in detail.

The native part is not in contention, the part that specifies that Native Outsiders are susceptible to a spell that "Kills" by returning an outsider to its native plane is. Native outsiders don't go anywhere, because they're already on their home plane. Banishment or Dismissal cast on a native outsider sends it nowhere, no will save required, it fails.

I'm sorry you're grumpy.

work inappropriate material? Tormak, the age rating of Amia was removed

Seriously, I don't mind my thread being jacked for a constructive reason, but if you're just going to be a pain, gtfo. I have a legitimate question and I'd like it answered.

CouncilofAutumn wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

All Aasimar, Tieflings and Genasi are Outsider (Native). I explicitly said this. Pay attention. Hell, your inseparable other half CoA even quotes the part of Outsider (Native) that explains this fact in detail.

The native part is not in contention, the part that specifies that Native Outsiders are susceptible to a spell that "Kills" by returning an outsider to its native plane is. Native outsiders don't go anywhere, because they're already on their home plane. Banishment or Dismissal cast on a native outsider sends it nowhere, no will save required, it fails.

I'm sorry you're grumpy.

Okay, if you're going to be nit picky, then I'll break it down for you.

It kills because we say it kills.

AxlLeigh wrote:

I have a legitimate question and I'd like it answered.

As I view it, if you give consent for your character to be obliterated by whatever means then you should honor your word as a player and wait for a TR before playing the character again.

drahgon wrote:

work inappropriate material? Tormak, the age rating of Amia was removed

Age rating has nothing to do with the fact that you still cannot post pornographic images on the forum. If you want to bother arguing this, I can just toss my leniency out the window and give you the ban I should have given you. Would you prefer that?

ainjyll wrote:

Okay, if you're going to be nit picky, then I'll break it down for you.

It kills because we say it kills.

You guys are really unjustifiably angry about this, which says to me you deal with a lot of buttheads on a regular basis (like the guy arguing about posting saucy pictures on here, above). Somewhere out there, somebody ruined your day, and now I get to pay for it. I'm sorry about that, but I am not a butthead, nor am I asking this question just to hear myself talk. I honestly think there's a discrepancy here but if you guys want to devolve to ad hominem and assume I'm out to get you, be my guest.

You're the one that told us to say

Quote:

You should just say "That's the way the game mechanics work so we have to roll with it in game," rather than trying to defend something that doesn't make sense.

So we did and now you're mad?

Make up your mind.

TormakSaber wrote:

You're the one that told us to say

Quote:

You should just say "That's the way the game mechanics work so we have to roll with it in game," rather than trying to defend something that doesn't make sense.

So we did and now you're mad?

Make up your mind.

I'm not mad.

I'm disappointed that instead of discussing mechanics with me, you guys got incensed and are now frustrated and angry that your time is being 'wasted.' Like this isn't a hobby we all share.

I had been clinging to hope that perhaps you'd put the gun down and talk.

No, you asked a question and got an answer. Because you didn't like the answer you received, you've gone to quoting sources in the hopes that the answer magically changes.

In case you haven't realized it yet, you should not attempt to adjust your set. We control the vertical, we control the horizontal. (Pardon the weak Twilight Zone reference, I couldn't resist myself.)

We, as the DM's, have the complete right to toss out whatever we want and include whatever we want. Things are the way they are because we say they are that way. That's all you really need to know on an OOC level.

If you're interested in pursuing this bit of trivia on an IC level, then feel free to do so and contact a DM to see if you can get one to oversee your progress or lack thereof. As it stands right now, all you need to know as a player is that native outsiders can still be affected by spells that affect outsiders, even if they are on their native plain which in this case is the Material Plane.

Ad hominem implies that I'm attacking your character instead of the argument which you are presenting, which is false. I addressed your argument by saying that it is the way that it is because that is the way that it is and you have been told that several times already.

So, please... just stop now. When I start calling you an idiot and questioning your intentions for this knowledge or implying that you may use such knowledge to the detriment of your fellow players, then you can toss out ad hominem. Until such a point in time, learn how to properly apply fallacies and just accept what we've said as the gospel, because as it stands, we are the gods here and we write the Good Book of Amia.

P.S. ~ I'm not mad at all, I just share Tormak's frustration at constantly having to reword and restate the same thing 1,000 times before people seem to understand what we're saying.

I completely understand if you guys want to run things a certain way, I just wanted you to know that if you're looking to make the game more closely aligned with canon and the way the spells Banishment and Dismissal (not all spells that affect Outsiders, just the ones that send them away) work, then there's still room for fixing.

ainjyll wrote:

P.S. ~ I'm not mad at all, I just share Tormak's frustration at constantly having to reword and restate the same thing 1,000 times before people seem to understand what we're saying.

It's probably because you guys have to work with the mechanics of NWN to try to emulate D&D, and sometimes you just have to make stuff up. There's tons of intuitive mechanics well-documented and available for general consumption in the forms of the books published about D&D, but when you guys make stuff up and justify it with "because," don't be surprised if you have to explain it over and over again.

As someone who has argued the Banishment/Dismissal thing to death, it's just easier to understand it as "In Amian lore, the two spells kill planetouched creatures, for some magical reason that has never really been specified."

I know what Ainjyll and Tormak mean, it gets tedious to reword and restate answers and go through the same rigmarole every time. But an answer that leads to less conflict is the one I created for myself "The spell is significantly different in our Realm than the one in PnP." Just like Bigby's, just like Awaken, just like any other spell that is changed from its original form. It can all easily be explained that way.

The fact that it is not in the listed spell changes and that any time someone asks for the lore reasoning(inevitably presenting the core PnP reasons why it shouldn't work) and get's slapped with "It just is, deal with it, okay?!" does not sate the questioner. Again, I totally, totally understand how you guys are DMs and get tired just like the rest of us, but you've got to look at the source eventually. The lore is not out there so we know it is changed --> when people question it, they get a "because we said so" rather than the lore reason they asked--> resentment from questioner because they feel they've only asked a normal question --> frustration on DM's part because they've answered it 50 times.

Dark Immolation wrote:

As someone who has argued the Banishment/Dismissal thing to death, it's just easier to understand it as "In Amian lore, the two spells kill planetouched creatures, for some magical reason that has never really been specified."

I know what Ainjyll and Tormak mean, it gets tedious to reword and restate answers and go through the same rigmarole every time. But an answer that leads to less conflict is the one I created for myself "The spell is significantly different in our Realm than the one in PnP." Just like Bigby's, just like Awaken, just like any other spell that is changed from its original form. It can all easily be explained that way.

The fact that it is not in the listed spell changes and that any time someone asks for the lore reasoning(inevitably presenting the core PnP reasons why it shouldn't work) and get's slapped with "It just is, deal with it, okay?!" does not sate the questioner. Again, I totally, totally understand how you guys are DMs and get tired just like the rest of us, but you've got to look at the source eventually. The lore is not out there so we know it is changed --> when people question it, they get a "because we said so" rather than the lore reason they asked--> resentment from questioner because they feel they've only asked a normal question --> frustration on DM's part because they've answered it 50 times.

I worship you.

...

I have watched banishment return an npc character to their own plane, on amia, a devil to be specific, if that rings any bells. no biggie though its kind of mechanically impossible to prevent it from effecting tieflings only in the abyss anyway probably? I would guess it is.

Quote:

no biggie though its kind of mechanically impossible to prevent it from effecting tieflings only in the abyss anyway probably? I would guess it is.

Read the topic. No. PAy attention here.

I'm going to jump in and give you the lore reason with an example as to why native outsiders die.

Ever connected two C-cell batteries together into a loop with no energy loss. They get really hot and then explode. This is what occurs to native outsiders when they get banished.

Thats an example btw its not what happens because realisitically you don't need to know why that it does happen only that when a native outsider gets banished it dies. The spell kills it and causes it to exist and not exist on the material plane at the same time. Its almost a schrodingers cat except the outcome is always -death- because of the exact forces involved.

I could go on and on and on with thousands of reasons as to why you die as a native outsider. But I have to go to work.

MoshingChris wrote:

I'm going to jump in and give you the lore reason with an example as to why native outsiders die.

Ever connected two C-cell batteries together into a loop with no energy loss. They get really hot and then explode. This is what occurs to native outsiders when they get banished.

Thats an example btw its not what happens because realisitically you don't need to know why that it does happen only that when a native outsider gets banished it dies. The spell kills it and causes it to exist and not exist on the material plane at the same time. Its almost a schrodingers cat except the outcome is always -death- because of the exact forces involved.

I could go on and on and on with thousands of reasons as to why you die as a native outsider. But I have to go to work.

I imagine it something like, the banishment spell tries to remove the outsider heritage of the person from the plane, essentially trying to rip the person apart, but since the spell isnt made to tear someone apart, it simply kills them in the process.

I have two personal theories:

1. Since it works off of an outsider being an outsider to work and move it back to its native plane, the spells only "partially" moves someone of partial heritage back to that plane as well. In other words, the spell stops with you being in two planes at once, or at least trying to push you over to the other side. The result is the spell ends and you're violently shunted back onto the prime. I'm not 100% sure what this would look like IC though. I figure something like instantaneous physical manifestation back into the area you are. It looks like you "blink" from the plane a sec, only to reappear with a *thud* and fall dead from the preternatural shear stress of mortal being pinned between two realms of existence.

2. Another theory is this: since an outsider's body and soul are one and the same, the spell can easily push an outsider's soul/body back to the plane of origin. The function of the spell is to push outsiders' souls(and with it their bodies) back across the borders of existence. To a full outsider, this is fine, they show up on the other side just the same. However, you try to do this to a person who is human and a very small part outsider, oops! The spell still succeeds in pushing the outsider-esque soul back over the planar borders, but as your body and soul are not the same, only your soul goes. It just pushes your soul out of you and into another plane, and your body falls dead, physically unharmed from the spell, but souless. Thus Banish/Dismissal work in a brute-hack way of removing the soul as compared to Necromancy's way of doing it. Instead of manipulating the soul itself, you just let the natural laws of the universe do it for you when you try to transport them.

Guiding principle of Amia = WYSIWIG

Something that I and a few other DM's adhere to is:

I don't need your silly fucking DnD canon, I'm more creative than half the ass-hats at a multi-million dollar company whose creative direction has been getting more and more removed from in-depth detailing to simple "This is how this works"

I haven't played a Canon pnp Campaign since my very first campaign, home brew, house rules and home lore is far more interesting than some silly shit that a couple of aging failed writers can come up with to guide my creative flux. Fuck that.

Quote:

I'm disappointed that instead of discussing mechanics with me, you guys got incensed and are now frustrated and angry that your time is being 'wasted.' Like this isn't a hobby we all share.

Why should I discuss mechanics with you on the forum? This is the type of thing you guys should research in game. This is why the DM team gets aggravated because for a bunch of adherents to a Roleplaying ideal, your own admission by the way, you are all so counter-intuitively obsessed with knowing everything in an ooc fashion that you kill the mystery in game. Whats the point of a mystery if you know who the killer is before hand. I personally can't help but query the obsession.

There is no basis for theoretical discussion if it will have no impact in game, this sort of discussion should happen after some sort of player driven plot initiation in character. You can all take a leaf out of Rogaku and, to a lesser extent Nivo', book in regards to this.

It certainly does evade a headache to give a lore-sensible answer to players about their questions, and eventually, you do get one (or a few, from which you may cherry-pick). Of course, this "eventually" is nebulous and can take, perhaps, years.

I have a little trick I like to pull that saves the DMs time and energy and lets us focus on what we need to focus on while giving you players a (sometimes undeserved) sense of importance:

Why don't you tell us, lorewise, why it happens the way it does IG? Remember, WYSIWYG, so crush canon beneath your feet and offer up an original, imaginative explanation for the occurrence IG and if it is sensible and good, we just might say, "Ok, that's how it works, yay."

That is more or less what DI just did, and he did so without prompting, so good for him!

The funny thing here is what Letum noted: Planetouched PCs need not be native to Toril. As the subrace descriptions, lore, common sense and existing PCs testify, many come from other planes. Yet they are still considered Outsider (Native).

I'm not contesting this. Tormak said correctly: the Planetouched subraces are Native Outsiders. But it's worth noting, because it's incredibly confusing, that even if our mechanics treat Planetouched as Native Outsiders they don't necessarily have to be native to Toril. It also makes Letum's question perfectly understandable, and not trivial in the least (though it was treated as such).

It makes no sense. Let's leave it at that and enjoy the mysteries of magic! It's only a problem if you make it a problem.

Really I think it just boils down to what that other person said (quoted above).

Sometimes I just want to know if you guys have a reason for why stuff is different. Once *I* know, I will pass that info along.

AND

You guys probably get all of these questions because you have to make stuff up but there's no documentation explaining the change.

MoshingChris: Yeah, I like the idea of researching it in game, now that I know it wasn't some sort of oversight that the spell doesn't work at all the way it's supposed to. That's going on the list of things my character (who comes from mainland Faerun) is like "What the hell, Amia" about. Which has, admittedly, provided a great deal of role play in the form of consternation and hilarity.

Quote:

hat's going on the list of things my character (who comes from mainland Faerun) is like "What the hell, Amia" about.

It should not, because Amia is not different. This is how it works all over Faerun. Your character is the one that is wrong.

More or less, it's just that the changes we see in spells are not exclusive to the physical Amia Island, they're universal in our game. So no character from the mainland would notice a difference simply because in our Realms, it works as such everywhere. Just like no mage from the "mainland" would think "Why do I have to use Mage's Feathers on this island", they would have always require that component, even back on the "off-screen".

We might want to make a note of that somewhere in lore, it's a very common misconception. Though us veterans might understand it easily, plenty of folk have asked before "Are spells on Amia different from the mainland(PnP?)". That, and actually thinking the our mainland works based of PnP.

Every time someone says "canon" I think:

Cannon

Canon is the proper term.

But back on topic: Admittedly, I didn't really read this thread. But my opinion of burning corpses and spreading the ashes just seems to be an ego stroke for the victors. To go through so much effort to ensure the character doesn't come back is a dick move. But so is coming back so soon after death to menace the people that beat you. A little common courtesy goes a long way.

It might be a dick move but in some cases, it's ICly the measures likely to be taken by those who've been around long enough to see how the island works , sadly.

I don't like it , but.. most people (I'll admit sometimes myself) don't like having their characters stay down for the count.

Oh, I'm aware of why it happens. I simply think that some people ought to be more amenable to long-term captivity if they get beaten so much. I know if I repeatedly attacked a certain group, I'd fully expect to be held prisoner instead of killed since execution had not worked before.

Corpse Burning and True Res?

Who is online