Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[John Johnston]

I'd go with previously sentient undead having souls, whereas previously bestial undead wouldn't.  I don't hold with the "puppet" idea too much (unless we're to imagine a very bored necromancer sitting around in the wilderness somewhere animating Skeletal Hoary Marmots, hmm? ).  I think undeaditude definitely takes whatever the creature's prior motivation was and replaces it with "kill, kill, kill!"  That may or may not be such a big step.

[Shador]

Well, in DF, it could vary from world to world, right? So in one world, undead could be animated by tormented souls trapped inside them. In another, undead could basically be puppets, with magic pulling their strings. In yet another, undead could be corpses possessed by demons. Symbiotic fungi, mad science-type serum, the influence of evil gods, maybe even all of the above. The possibilities are limitless.

[Neonivek]

I don't think sentient undead should be the only ones with souls. Afterall animals have souls as well.

Even after that the undead could have their intelligence crippled to the point of animal-like behavior even though they still have a soul.

Though as I said, it doesn't have to be a human soul. (Or a real soul)

[Ascii Kid]

And all this talk raises another question: When Smash LeDeaddwarf returns as a Zombie and you kill him again, have you murdered Zombie Smash?  I would say no, you han't, don't be stupid, it's not Smash any more.  BUT, without intereacting with him, say you just say him shuffling down the street, you might not realise he's a Zombie (if he's fairly fresh and well covered) and, thus, wouldn't destory (in your current mind murder) him. 
This is why I'd sudjest the three tier soul system, perhaps described a little imperfectly.  In this system, everything has a soul which allows it to exist (which is, I think, kind of Shintoist, but I could be all wrong), which the soul stats define.  This would be the soul "possessing" any living body, or animating any undead creature.  Perhaps, as sudjested Greiger, a necromancer can use the power from this level of soul to give power to collections of bones and body parts, or use magic to transfer the animator soul from simple creatures like cows and doves.  Maybe to power released by sacrificing things with the second level of soul releases much more power, animating many piles of bones. 
So yes, undead have a soul, but the soul has an asterix.
The next tier down is what defines the presence of self awareness.  Base undead and animals lack this "moral" level, which the social stats define.  The thing that seperates the two in the natural and unnatural presence of the third level, which the physical stats define. 

[Neonivek]

You didn't kill him again because he is undead, he isn't alive or dead!

[Demonic Gophers]

Wouldn't the situation be different if Smash retained his mind and memories in undeath than if he didn't, and was just lurching around strangling people?

[Neonivek]

Wouldn't the situation be different if Smash retained his mind and memories in undeath than if he didn't, and was just lurching around strangling people?

Yeah but it really depends what the view of being undead is. Is it truely horrible being undead? Is undeath/unlife an imposition on nature?

I would certainly be interesting.

[Heavy Flak]

I don't think sentient undead should be the only ones with souls. Afterall animals have souls as well.

Why, exactly, do animals have souls?  What is a "soul"?  I think it's something that's unique to creatures that have higher thought.  Creatures that are intelligent (or have an intelligent tag), are able to make choices.  They can do good, or evil.  They can be greedy, they can love.  Look at how Toady is breaking away from making Goblins just an "evil" race - they have souls, and they have free choice.

Look at an animal.  Nothing an animal does is malicious.  Rhesus Monkeys aren't stealing your mugs because they want to hurt you, they do it because they're shiny and there.  Bears aren't drinking your booze and mauling your haulers because it's fun (spoiler - it is fun), they're doing it because they like bear, and they need to eat meat. 

That's why you don't have Vampire Bears, because they can't make the choices, they don't have the soul tethered, or the innate intelligence. 

[Neonivek]

That's why you don't have Vampire Bears

Actually we do have a lot of Vampire animals... Usually Vampires don't make vampire undead because they arn't useful (Why the heck would you want a bloodthirsty superpowered Bear when you can't control it?)

Why do souls have to represent your conscience or at least the ability to make conscience choices?

Though that being said Animal and Sentient Souls could be different.

[chaoticag]

Why are you guys discussing whether the undead should have souls?

Why are you not discussing instead whether it should be possible to rip out said souls and beat people to death with them? and whether or not they will rot?

[Neonivek]

Why are you guys discussing whether the undead should have souls?

Why are you not discussing instead whether it should be possible to rip out said souls and beat people to death with them? and whether or not they will rot?

Souls arn't physical weapons or physical objects... They do not bounce off of eachother but they can exert force on one another or in extreme cases the physical.

So I guess the answer is yes and no. You can't just pull out any old soul and expect to be beating people to death with it.

[Demonic Gophers]

That's what you think!

-The spinning chaoticag's soul strikes Neonivek in the upper left arm.
-It is bruised!

[Neonivek]

That's what you think!

-The spinning chaoticag's soul strikes Neonivek in the upper left arm.
-It is bruised!

Oww, you also gave me soulburn

[chaoticag]

So.... is my soul rotting yet?

[Tenebrais]

I don't think sentient undead should be the only ones with souls. Afterall animals have souls as well.

Why, exactly, do animals have souls?  What is a "soul"?  I think it's something that's unique to creatures that have higher thought.  Creatures that are intelligent (or have an intelligent tag), are able to make choices.  They can do good, or evil.  They can be greedy, they can love.  Look at how Toady is breaking away from making Goblins just an "evil" race - they have souls, and they have free choice.

Look at an animal.  Nothing an animal does is malicious.  Rhesus Monkeys aren't stealing your mugs because they want to hurt you, they do it because they're shiny and there.  Bears aren't drinking your booze and mauling your haulers because it's fun (spoiler - it is fun), they're doing it because they like bear, and they need to eat meat. 

That's why you don't have Vampire Bears, because they can't make the choices, they don't have the soul tethered, or the innate intelligence. 

Why shouldn't animals have souls? They make choices. They just happen to be uninformed choices, since they cannot predict the results of their actions.
For most animals, there is no direct path from stimulus to response, except for pure reflexes. Compare to, say, a tree, which only makes any action at all due to chemicals within being directly affected by the environment. So most animals have some free will (if not a wide range of things to choose between). Hence, animals would have souls.