I would have to say that they are valid targets in that case. It mentions undead are powered by negative life force. Even if you disagree in general terms, in the context of the spell, it seems to use 'soul' and 'life force' interchangeably, since it mentions forcing a soul somewhere and also attacking a life force (in which case the only attack is moving the soul). I doubt that undead have a life force.įor purposes of magic jar, the spell wording seems to indicate that they do. As a GM I would probably rule the phylactery is proof against such things, since it's a powerful item specifically made to protect the lich's soul from such events.ĭiego Rossi wrote: The target need to have both a life force and a soul. Kind of like a situation where'd you'd be trying to magic jar a body of a person whose also using magic jar (you couldn't target their body, but maybe the gem will let you sense their life force in their gem and you'd just be swapping places). For instance, a lich might be considered immune if its soul is contained in a phylactery and not in its body, though it's probably safer to assume it only moves to the phylactery when its body is destroyed.Īs for whether you could sense it and force it into the gem if you were near the phylactery is up to a GM call, though it would just leave you trapped in a phylactery in its place. With the broad number of differing types of undead it's not inconceivable that there might be a special case, however, such as an intelligent undead specifically described as being 'soulless'. So any intelligent undead should qualify. According to the magic jar spell, only sentient undead have (or are) souls.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |