D&D 5E How much of a corpse?

[brehobit]

Hi all,
I've got a question that is certainly something I think the right answer is "GM call" but I'd like to hear what answer each of you would give.

Speak with dead requires a corpse. How much of a corpse do you need?
(I expect this question is going to come up a lot with higher-level warlocks).

 

[Tormyr]

The requirement is a mouth attached to the corpse; the corpse cannot be undead; and the spell cannot have been used in the last 10 days. Nothing more.

 

[Boarstorm]

I'm reminded of a scene from Hellboy.

 

[Astrosicebear]

The requirement is a mouth attached to the corpse, and the spell cannot have been used in the last 10 days. Nothing more.

Does it have to be that corpses mouth? or can i use a mouth from another corpse?

 

[Desdichado]

What do you mean by "right answer?" What's the officially correct answer, or what would I do if I were the GM? To the first, I have no idea (nor do I really care) as to the second, I'd rule a head was sufficient.

 

[Tormyr]

Does it have to be that corpses mouth? or can i use a mouth from another corpse?

I could see adding a mouth as a creative solution, but it is going to have to be well integrated into where the mouth should be on the corpse. Something like a good Medicine check or artisan sewing tool check or something like that.

 

[Astrosicebear]

I could see adding a mouth as a creative solution, but it is going to have to be well integrated into where the mouth should be on the corpse. Something like a good Medicine check or artisan sewing tool check or something like that.

Would that matter? The voice is a product of the spell not the anatomy.

This just got strangely serious.

 

[Tormyr]

Would that matter? The voice is a product of the spell not the anatomy.

This just got strangely serious.

I just thought that would be reasonable. The spell requires the corpse to have a mouth, which tells me that it needs to be a part of the corpse. So I think the mouth needs to be incroporated into the corpse if the corpse is missing a mouth. Placing a jaw on top of a corpse would not make sense to me, nor would sewing a mouth onto the knee of a corpse would not me sense to me.

I think this would be a pretty hard case to have occur though. If the corpse lost its mouth, it probably lost its head as well. At that point, you are probably SOL. If you substituted another head, then you are speaking with the dead to the new head instead of the old corpse.

That is just what my interpretation would most likely be.

 

[the Jester]

I've always assumed a head was enough before, but from the wording of the spell, I'd say you need most of the corpse and the parts that you have must include the mouth.

No legs? No arms? Fine.

ONLY the head? Not enough.

 

[Desdichado]

I just thought that would be reasonable. The spell requires the corpse to have a mouth, which tells me that it needs to be a part of the corpse. So I think the mouth needs to be incroporated into the corpse if the corpse is missing a mouth. Placing a jaw on top of a corpse would not make sense to me, nor would sewing a mouth onto the knee of a corpse would not me sense to me.

I think this would be a pretty hard case to have occur though. If the corpse lost its mouth, it probably lost its head as well. At that point, you are probably SOL. If you substituted another head, then you are speaking with the dead to the new head instead of the old corpse.

That is just what my interpretation would most likely be.

If you're going to be that serious, how are you explaining the production of sound from a dead body with rotted vocal cords, no air in the lungs, rigor mortis in the muscles of the jaw, tongue and mouth, etc.?

"Realistically" there's no way to account for a corpse being able to produce any physical sound unless it's only been dead for a very short amount of time. The only way it works is through magic. And if that's the case, why does having any anatomy at all really matter?

Sometimes it doesn't pay to overthink this too much.