Death Knell question.

Lord Pendragon

First Post
Okay, it came up in conversation today, and since I have a cleric who makes regular use of this spell, I thought I'd get the facts straight.

From the SRD:
Death Knell
Necromancy [Death, Evil]
Level: Clr 2, Death 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: Living creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous/10 minutes per target HD (see text)
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
Upon casting this spell, the character touches a living creature with –1 hit points or lower. If the subject fails its saving throw, it dies, and the character gains 1d8 temporary hit points and +2 Strength. Additionally, the character's effective caster level goes up by +1, improving spell effects dependent on caster level. (This increase in effective caster level does not grant the character access to more spells.) These effects last for 10 minutes per HD of the target creature.
So. +2 Strength. Not an enhancement bonus. Not even a bonus, by the wording.

Does the +2 strength stack from multiple successful castings?

Does the +1 effective caster level?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


dcollins said:
The effect from a single spell shouldn't ever stack with itself. I'd treat these examples effectively as unnamed bonuses.
You confuse me. Are you saying that because it's the same spell, the bonuses shouldn't stack, or because they're unnamed bonuses, they should?
 

The former. PHB p. 153: "Spells that give bonuses.. usually do not stack with themselves." This comes before (takes precendence over) any discussion of named bonus type issues. One example given there is haste, whose extra partial action is also not listed as a bonus of any type.
 
Last edited:

Hmm. I was aware of the bonuses-from-the-same-spell rule before, but what still puzzles me is the wording of the spell. Firstly, that rule says usually, not always, and I'm not sure that it "takes precedence" over naming conventions.

And the spell specifically says +2 Strength. In the same book with spells such as Cat's Grace, which grants "an enhancement bonus to dexterity of..." If it were a slip-up, it should have been errata'ed. If not, then it's meant to stack.

Now the temporary hp from the spell, I'd think, wouldn't stack. I've seen endless debates regarding Vampiric Touch, vampiric weapons, and Claws of the Vampire, and to the best of my knowledge, they always wind up stating that these temporary hit points overlap, but don't stack.

The +1 caster level is hard to say. I'd probably go with the "same spell" clause here, since, like Haste, it's providing a non-bonus type effect. Three Haste spells won't get you three partial actions, and three Death Knell spells probably don't get you +3 caster level. Then again, as Death Knell is so hard to use, perhaps it was supposed to.

Of course, if any of the effects of Death Knell stack, then the bucket o' snails problem comes up. But that comes up with lots of game mechanics, so it's just something the DM would have to nix outright (the snails, not necessarily the stacking).

Any other opinions?
 

IMO, multiple castings overlap.

In general, a single spell does not stack with itself unless the description specifically says so. Death knell is worded rather oddly, but I don't think it's intended to be an exception to the general rule. (It is rather vague though. I'm hoping 3.5 rewords it, to state that it grants a profane bonus.)

As a house rule, I might let the durations stack. Zap three creatures of 10 HD each, and you still only have +2 Str and +1 CL, but it'd last for five hours.
 

AuraSeer said:
IMO, multiple castings overlap.

In general, a single spell does not stack with itself unless the description specifically says so. Death knell is worded rather oddly, but I don't think it's intended to be an exception to the general rule. (It is rather vague though. I'm hoping 3.5 rewords it, to state that it grants a profane bonus.)

As a house rule, I might let the durations stack. Zap three creatures of 10 HD each, and you still only have +2 Str and +1 CL, but it'd last for five hours.
That'd actually be a darned decent house rule. I may ask my DM whether or not he'd rule it that way. But from what you and others say, I suppose that the general opinion is that Death Knell probably wasn't meant to stack, so that's the baseline from which to go.
 

In addition to the general rule that the same spell's effects do not stack, you should consider the ramifications if death knell could stack:

A cleric with a wand of death knell and a dozen captives. In roughly two and a half minutes he's sacrficed them all and gained +24 STR, +12 caster levels, for 10 min/HD. Even if you only allow duration to stack, he gets +2 STR and +1 caster level for a minimum of 2 hours (assuming normal humans for captives).
 

Sir Whiskers said:
In addition to the general rule that the same spell's effects do not stack, you should consider the ramifications if death knell could stack:

A cleric with a wand of death knell and a dozen captives. In roughly two and a half minutes he's sacrficed them all and gained +24 STR, +12 caster levels, for 10 min/HD. Even if you only allow duration to stack, he gets +2 STR and +1 caster level for a minimum of 2 hours (assuming normal humans for captives).
I agree with you. That's what I meant by the "bucket o' snails" problem. The cleric could do the same thing by carrying around a number of weak creatures to squish and absorb at need. For that problem, I'd usually just (as a DM) quash it in the bud. As a player, I don't think I could bring myself to suggest it in the first place, so my DM's safe.

Regarding the duration, though. Do you think that would be unbalancing? I can actually see an evil cleric killing peasants for something like that, and it's not so great a benefit that it would unbalance things (it seems). And that would allow multiple Death Knells to be useful without being unbalancing.

Though that would be a house rule, as already pointed out.
 

I know a DM who had the bad guy carry around a sack of kittens, just so he could sacrifice them in front of the PC's.

Just to drive home that the guy was "Evil". :)
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top