Share Spells & Caster Death

[Necrosnoop110]

What happens to the share spells ability when the caster dies?

Thanks,
Necro

[Garryl]

Why would anything happen? D&D isn't like an MMO or CRPG where spell effects end when the creature they targeted dies.

[Necrosnoop110]

Why would anything happen? D&D isn't like an MMO or CRPG where spell effects end when the creature they targeted dies.

My reasoning was not along the lines of a MMO or CRPG as I barely know what those things are ... I was thinking more along the lines of how the person that you have to be next to (within 5') is no longer fully there. In the sense that a dead caster is now more object than creature. I'm not pushing for a preconceived conclusion, just exploring the idea.     

Peace,
Necro

[NunoM]

A similar question arose in my party, but in regards to the caster being inside a AMF...

Anyway... in the case of the caster's death:
- if the spell required concentration to be kept, it would act like the concentration was lost at the time of death.
- if not, i would allow it to act like any other spell, say, a "Bull's Strength", until the end of it's normal duration.

EDIT:

My reasoning was not along the lines of a MMO or CRPG as I barely know what those things are ... I was thinking more along the lines of how the person that you have to be next to (within 5') is no longer fully there. In the sense that a dead caster is now more object than creature. I'm not pushing for a preconceived conclusion, just exploring the idea.     

Hmm... Never thought of it that way. Sounds good to me.
There's a druid in my party that has the feat "Companion Spellbound", which allows the companion to be further away for this purpose, but it still applies nonetheless.

[Necrosnoop110]

EDIT:

My reasoning was not along the lines of a MMO or CRPG as I barely know what those things are ... I was thinking more along the lines of how the person that you have to be next to (within 5') is no longer fully there. In the sense that a dead caster is now more object than creature. I'm not pushing for a preconceived conclusion, just exploring the idea.     

Hmm... Never thought of it that way. Sounds good to me.
There's a druid in my party that has the feat "Companion Spellbound", which allows the companion to be further away for this purpose, but it still applies nonetheless.

I mean think about it, would you as DM allow someone to gain the benefits of a paladin's Aura of Courage if the benefactor was within 10 feet of the paladin to gain a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects - if said paladin was on the ground dead? I realize that share spell and aura of courage are not exactly the same kinds of abilities but I think they are similar enough to see what I am saying.

[Raineh Daze]

Aura of Courage requires a living thing on the other end to keep powering it. If a spell doesn't require any sort of powering, then it'd make sense to keep going--you could check for a very buff corpse, I guess?

[Necrosnoop110]

Aura of Courage requires a living thing on the other end to keep powering it. If a spell doesn't require any sort of powering, then it'd make sense to keep going--you could check for a very buff corpse, I guess?

I'm not questioning whether or not a spell with a duration should continue after caster death (I think it should continue unless it requires concentration or some other continuous action by the caster). What I am questioning is the share spell ability, specifically the spells you cast upon yourself that are then shared with your animal companion and lost to the animal companion if he moves more than 5 feet away from the caster.

D&D 3.5 SRD: At the druid’s option, she may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself also affect her animal companion. The animal companion must be within 5 feet of her at the time of casting to receive the benefit. If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the animal companion if the companion moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the animal again, even if it returns to the druid before the duration expires.

My question isn't about the duration of the spell but of the conditions of the share spell ability. Specifically, how can you be next to a caster that is essentially no longer really "there"? Especially, if you consider a dead creature an object and no longer a creature.

To make this argument clearer, let's say the caster was disintegrated and all that was left was dust, would the animal companion be considered to be within 5' feat of the caster if it was standing next to that pile of dust that was once the caster? 

[Garryl]

I mean think about it, would you as DM allow someone to gain the benefits of a paladin's Aura of Courage if the benefactor was within 10 feet of the paladin to gain a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects - if said paladin was on the ground dead? I realize that share spell and aura of courage are not exactly the same kinds of abilities but I think they are similar enough to see what I am saying.

No, because Aura of Courage specifically stops when the Paladin is unconscious or dead. Share Spells has no such restriction.

Aura of Courage requires a living thing on the other end to keep powering it. If a spell doesn't require any sort of powering, then it'd make sense to keep going--you could check for a very buff corpse, I guess?

I'm not questioning whether or not a spell with a duration should continue after caster death (I think it should continue unless it requires concentration or some other continuous action by the caster). What I am questioning is the share spell ability, specifically the spells you cast upon yourself that are then shared with your animal companion and lost to the animal companion if he moves more than 5 feet away from the caster.

D&D 3.5 SRD: At the druid’s option, she may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself also affect her animal companion. The animal companion must be within 5 feet of her at the time of casting to receive the benefit. If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the animal companion if the companion moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the animal again, even if it returns to the druid before the duration expires.

My question isn't about the duration of the spell but of the conditions of the share spell ability. Specifically, how can you be next to a caster that is essentially no longer really "there"? Especially, if you consider a dead creature an object and no longer a creature.

To make this argument clearer, let's say the caster was disintegrated and all that was left was dust, would the animal companion be considered to be within 5' feat of the caster if it was standing next to that pile of dust that was once the caster? 

I don't see any reason for the corpse of the caster to count as any different from the caster alive as far as Share Spells is concerned. The caster is still where he or she was before, just dead. Likewise, I would treat the dust just the same. I don't see anything in Disintegrate that would indicate otherwise.

[Necrosnoop110]

I don't see any reason for the corpse of the caster to count as any different from the caster alive as far as Share Spells is concerned. The caster is still where he or she was before, just dead. Likewise, I would treat the dust just the same. I don't see anything in Disintegrate that would indicate otherwise.

You have a good point and I acknowledge that; Share Spell's RAW does not mention a conditional based upon consciousness or life.

Just to push this a little more, let me ask a follow up, would you allow a caster to cut off his finger and give it to his animal companion and allow the animal companion to be considered next to the caster for purposes of Share Spell while he has the caster's finger in his pocket?

Peace,
Necro

[Halinn]

I don't see any reason for the corpse of the caster to count as any different from the caster alive as far as Share Spells is concerned. The caster is still where he or she was before, just dead. Likewise, I would treat the dust just the same. I don't see anything in Disintegrate that would indicate otherwise.

You have a good point and I acknowledge that; Share Spell's RAW does not mention a conditional based upon consciousness or life.

Just to push this a little more, let me ask a follow up, would you allow a caster to cut off his finger and give it to his animal companion and allow the animal companion to be considered next to the caster for purposes of Share Spell while he has the caster's finger in his pocket?

Peace,
Necro

Treat it akin to regeneration. The piece that would become a new wizard if he were to be chopped up into pieces and had regeneration somehow is the one the familiar has to stay near.

[Kethrian]

Treat it akin to regeneration. The piece that would become a new wizard if he were to be chopped up into pieces and had regeneration somehow is the one the familiar has to stay near.

And if that severed finger was wearing a Ring of Regeneration?

[Halinn]

Treat it akin to regeneration. The piece that would become a new wizard if he were to be chopped up into pieces and had regeneration somehow is the one the familiar has to stay near.

And if that severed finger was wearing a Ring of Regeneration?

Treat it as if someone had just taken off your ring. It's not connected to the part of the wizard that would regenerate, so the magic has no way to grow new parts.

[Kethrian]

But if your finger is the only part of you that has regeneration, would it not be the only part that could be the regenerative seed?  The rest of the body doesn't have regeneration, so it isn't a valid choice, is it?

[Halinn]

But if your finger is the only part of you that has regeneration, would it not be the only part that could be the regenerative seed?  The rest of the body doesn't have regeneration, so it isn't a valid choice, is it?

But in removing it, the finger is no longer part of you. To me, only the part that would regenerate, given regular Regeneration, matters. If the ring is on a body part connected to that, it works, otherwise... too bad.
Of course it doesn't help that there aren't clear rules for which part regenerates, nor even chopping off limbs.

[Necrosnoop110]

But if your finger is the only part of you that has regeneration, would it not be the only part that could be the regenerative seed?  The rest of the body doesn't have regeneration, so it isn't a valid choice, is it?

But in removing it, the finger is no longer part of you. To me, only the part that would regenerate, given regular Regeneration, matters. If the ring is on a body part connected to that, it works, otherwise... too bad.
Of course it doesn't help that there aren't clear rules for which part regenerates, nor even chopping off limbs.

That gets at the germ of my line of questioning. If a finger is no longer "you" then how can a pile of dust be "you" or even a corpse be considered "you"? Again, I realize and concede that their is no RAW stating that death or unconsciousness ends the share spell ability but isn't the conditional for share spell (at least the aspect I am talking about) for the animal companion to be within 5' of the caster - how can you be within 5' of someone who is no longer really there?

[Halinn]

But if your finger is the only part of you that has regeneration, would it not be the only part that could be the regenerative seed?  The rest of the body doesn't have regeneration, so it isn't a valid choice, is it?

But in removing it, the finger is no longer part of you. To me, only the part that would regenerate, given regular Regeneration, matters. If the ring is on a body part connected to that, it works, otherwise... too bad.
Of course it doesn't help that there aren't clear rules for which part regenerates, nor even chopping off limbs.

That gets at the germ of my line of questioning. If a finger is no longer "you" then how can a pile of dust be "you" or even a corpse be considered "you"? Again, I realize and concede that their is no RAW stating that death or unconsciousness ends the share spell ability but isn't the conditional for share spell (at least the aspect I am talking about) for the animal companion to be within 5' of the caster - how can you be within 5' of someone who is no longer really there?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSf9aEETnvE

[Kethrian]

Ah, saying "magic" or "a wizard did it" isn't exactly going to work when magic and wizards are statted out and have observable, knowable rules.

[NunoM]

Well... i gathered a few thoughts after i last posted here. Here goes:

Considering that a magical effect can be made permanent, which means it actually will last longer than the caster's death ("death" as in "ceasing to be alive", therefore liches and such are not included in this definition ), i see no reason why a spell cast, whichever it is, won't subside to the end of it's duration after the caster's death, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

However, regarding the rules for sharing spells with animal companions (and familiars, BTW), to keep it simple, i'd rule that the spell ceases to affect the companion/familiar. You can see it as if the essence/soul/consciousness of the caster left his/her body and headed towards the plane of the favored deity.
This way, it doesn't matter if there's only a finger, a tooth, a nail or dust left of the caster.

Also, would you rule that the caster is 5ft away, if the companion/familiar goes around with a lock of hair of the caster tied around it's neck? I wouldn't!