Eating Monsters (D&D 3.5)
 

This is a short thing.

I send a giant spider at my players, who at that point have gone through most of their rations. And then one of the player announces, "we eat the spider". What do you think, should eating monsters be allowed, or should it require some kind of survival, or craft: cooking check or something similar?

In another place, the characters invoked the ire of some of those sentient ostrich creatures. Now, because they killed them rather swiftly and decided not to investigate what they just killed (which I had expected them to do), they did not realize they killed something sentient. So, the character announces, "We cook and eat the ostrich things." Same question as before.

To add to the predicament, I have a werewolf. Wolves are known to eat raw meat and survive. It seems to me that werewolves can do so, too. Or else their Bite attack would be problematic. So, should that werewolf be allowed to just devour anything they kill, except maybe for acidic oozes?

Well... cooking something so that it tastes good and is enjoyable to eat takes skill... charring something until it's safe to eat (from a digestive/health standpoint) doesn't take any skill at all. I've seen that proven over and over on fishing trips, lol.

I'd say the same as above... but if they share how "good" the giant ostriches tasted at the next village that has a treaty with them they're in for a rude awakening, likely in shackles and or under serious "house arrest" pending compensation in the least. Saving a group of those same people or some suitable geas based quest might then be in order, heh. It could cause serious IC mental/moral anguish as well... all of that based on discovering their mistake of course. *shrug*

As a DM I'd say decide if the animal/creature, sentient or not, has the potential to carry a disease, off the cuff/on the fly or more regimented. If they do then I'd have the character roll a save vs. that but otherwise I'd let 'em chow down to their hearts content. It of course might cause inter-party conflict... but that's their problem to deal with, heh. ;) Edit: After one failed save the character likely won't be eating any "roadkill" again, lol.

You may require some Knowledge checks to see if the creature is actually edible, but they can eat pretty much anything, and a lot of it is probably perfectly safe, like the spider. On the other hand, some things are probably dangerous or lethal; eating a demon should have consequences. You could flip through diseases until you find one that seems appropriate (Book of Vile Darkness has some good ones), or the poison tables. Eating magical beings, especially, should carry consequences. Get creative.

Outsiders, for example; their body is their soul. I believe the same holds true for elementals and fey. So, if you eat a succubus, you just devoured the soul of a demon. That could well result in having a second person inside of you vying for control of your body, or a fell presence manipulating their actions. There may be some saves against Suggestion effects coming along.

But for more mundane stuff, like people and spiders? Nah. Just let 'em eat it unmolested.

I ordinarily make the meat of creatures with a natural poison attack poisonous. If someone eats it, they get to make the Fort save the creature's poison naturally requires. For primary and secondary damage. Likewise for creatures that have a disease component to their attacks. All of this is easily thwarted by Purify Food & Drink.

For anything that isn't close to being a normal person/creature, I agree with what VV said.

I find it dubious that creatures with natural poison attacks are poisonous overall. The most common example would be vipers. The poison is an injury type and is essentially safe if ingested (the powerful, acidic environment of the stomach completely denatures the globins in the poison). On the other hand, many creatures which do not have poisonous attacks are rather lethally poisonous, like certain pufferfish. Do distinguish between defensive toxicity and offensive toxicity.

As for the eating thing, not all things are readily edible or digestible. If the creature is fire-resistant or fire-immune, you can't cook it. If it's acid-resistant or acid-immune, your stomach can't digest it. If it has natural DR, you can't chew it. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Speaking of which, trolls are neither acid immune nor fire immune. There are excellent troll chefs (as in, chefs that serve troll) who serve them live off of the rack and let them regenerate so the same, choice cuts can be served ad infinitum. I believe that troll phalluses are a particular delicacy.

Wouldn't a troll regrow after it left your stomach acid? Not much fun there.

No, since acid beats troll regeneration.

It's surprisingly chewy, though.

Heh. My players recently got a Heroes' Feast spell to produce some charred troll for them. Just for kicks. They also concluded that it was chewy.

Anyway. Eating a creature that has a poisonvenomous bite shouldn't subject someone to a chance at being subject to said venom. First off, said creature is very unlikely to have that venom secreted throughout its body; unless they're going straight for the venom glands they won't even be exposed to the venom. Secondly, venom typically works in the blood stream, which is not the same environment as the digestive system. Ingested venom would be rendered essentially harmless as AW has already said. The spiders should be basically safe to eat--good protein even.

Being sentient doesn't really change the nature of one's meat. The ostrich things shouldn't have a check to eat safely. Tastes like chicken, even! Should they find out what they did though, there should be moral repercussions, but physical? I see no reason for it.

When you start eating inherantly magical creatures, basically, +1 to what VV said. Magic is dangerous enough BEFORE you start eating it (food creation spells excluded of course).

I agree that eating spider isn't a problem.

I think the terms everyone is searching for are: ingestive and insinuative.
Ingestive is poisonous is ingested, but probably safe to inject, this is the poison to put in food.
Insinuative is poisonous is injected, but probably safe to ingest, and is such things as blade or spider poison.

If yours is a strictly biological amoral world, eating sentient beings is probably also fine.
But folklore is full of spiritual effects of eating people, which I'd extend to any sentient creature.
One origin for the wendigo is that it was once a human, but they ate human flesh and were transformed into a beast.
Also, the servants of the relevant gods might also have something to say about humans eating that gods worshipers.
Given that it was an accidental crime against nature, they should probably be allowed to atone by some appropriate act.

If I'm not mistaken, one of the books on the Hells mentions that devils, after dying, turn into a puddle of goo, (and their soul returns to their native Hell, where their body reforms) which require Fort saves if you try to eat them. I'd suspect the same applies to all kinds of Outsiders.

Well, I had an idea like that, but those things were from the Book of Vile Darkness or something similar, so I thought for this one offense I'd forgive them.


Seeing those two posts together... I should check if they weren't Outsiders.