| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| jordanz |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 13:58:33
It sounds like an oxymoron, but does anyone now the natural “lifespans” of the various undead types? Are some dead actually immortal? Does the “host” creature effect the undead's lifespan? For example would an vampiric elf live longer than a vampiric human? |
| 23 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 22:50:14
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
The introduction to the third chapter of the FRCG, "Magic," says this...
Undead fuel their minds and protect their corpses from dissolution through powerful necromantic rituals--especially liches, whose never-ending acquisition of arcane knowledge has propelled some into contention with the gods themselves.--FRCG, p. 48
'Cause it makes them look scarier?
That still leaves the basic questions of how, how oft, and why liches are always notably decomposed.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 20:34:58
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
The introduction to the third chapter of the FRCG, "Magic," says this...
Undead fuel their minds and protect their corpses from dissolution through powerful necromantic rituals--especially liches, whose never-ending acquisition of arcane knowledge has propelled some into contention with the gods themselves.--FRCG, p. 48
That still leaves the basic questions of how, how oft, and why liches are always notably decomposed. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 19:07:32
The introduction to the third chapter of the FRCG, "Magic," says this...
Undead fuel their minds and protect their corpses from dissolution through powerful necromantic rituals--especially liches, whose never-ending acquisition of arcane knowledge has propelled some into contention with the gods themselves.--FRCG, p. 48
|
| Fingal |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 18:45:45
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
All the way on topic, verbal descriptions of most undead -- particularly liches -- always seem to emphasize that the body is in some stage of decomposition. I think it's reasonable to assume that any intelligent undead would seek to slow down their decomposition. It's also reasonable to assume that some forms of undead -- again, particularly liches -- have slowed decomposition to begin with, perhaps as a side effect of however they became undead. But the descriptions -- and the existence of demi-liches -- seem to imply that the process can be greatly slowed down, but not fully stopped. Finding a way to advance decomposition might be an interesting way to battle a lich... It's more difficult to cast spells when your lower jaw falls off and your fingers crumble to dust. 
According to 'Dreams of the Red Wizards' Szass Tam uses a spell called 'preservation' to preserve his body. The spell seems to be used for food refrigeration but would appear to have other uses. Of course, the effects seem to be limited by the frequency of the casting - with Tam known to get a bit whiffy when he forgets - And it doesn't seem likely that other lichs such as Larloch use this method.
Mind you, I wonder whether Tam has found a better method over the years; by all accounts he seems to have remained in fairly good condition for, what, two or three centuries? If not, he must be sick of casting that one spell by now! |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 22:09:47
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
I have always taken undead lifespans to be as long as the magic that is animating them is active or they fall apart. Actually, it strikes me as odd that the Spellplague did not seem to effect undead creatures (from what I can tell) very much considering that they are completely kept together by magic. You would think that if it drove many mages insane, that it would have torn many undead (esp. liches) apart or just drained them of their unlife-sustaining energies. I just wish that they had applied actual logical properties and effects of the Spellplague rather than using it as their end-all catalyst for their changes without explaining the "why" of it. But I digress...
There is some bearing here though.... anti-magic shell doesn't affect undead. From this it could be surmised that the initial magic just "opens a link" to the negative material plane (or in 4e the shadow plane), and after this the link just continues to exist until the creature is destroyed somehow. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 02:51:47
I'm going to toss out an Ed quote, that doesn't really address "deathspans" (if you will), but does apply to this discussion:
quote:
Hello again, all.
Markustay, what SORT (wink, giggle) of comment were you looking for, re. “Raw Ed”? After all these years, I can make SO many . . .
And yes, Ed did create archliches for LOST SHIPS (after obtaining design approval from the TSR designers of the day to include a “good lich” in the game, to support some good or at least benign to PCs liches that had appeared in fiction and game products).
As for this comment, from Wooly Rupert: “I've always thought the deliberate embrace of undeath was a bit of an odd option for cheating death. One idea I've always preferred was for a mage to transfer his consciousness into a specially-prepared automaton. The end result (no longer worrying about death, aging, and other physical frailities) is the same, plus the automaton body would be more durable, nicer to look at, and wouldn't be physically rotting away. I know if I wanted to last a few more centuries, I'd choose an option where my fingers falling off wouldn't be a concern...”
. . . Ed has a response, as follows:
I see nothing at all wrong with your reasoning, Wooly, and although Newt Ewell specifically asked me to add a brief “drow biomech” section to the original (2nd Ed) DROW OF THE UNDERDARK, the “official but secret” design directives of the time were to avoid all “android and robot” flavouring in AD&D® because TSR was planning a robot roleplaying game, PROTON FIRE. Longtime DRAGON® readers may recall that it was featured in the back pages of just one issue of the magazine, as a preview; the game was “killed” on the very brink of its release by TSR’s upper management. So, just like de-emphasizing psionics in the Realms because they were to be a cornerstone of Dark Sun®, we were told to avoid mechanical/robotic/android/bionic elements for the AD&D® game. THAT’S why the embrace of undeath rather than the “build your own new body.”
As for the alternative “clone or birth your own new body and then move into it” approach, THAT ran afoul of the internal Code of Ethics, TSR wanting to avoid further trouble with the religious Moral Majority stances of the day. For years - - as various Realms NPCs have aged - - I have flirted and toyed in my Realms fiction with exploring the ethical choices they make about how to prolong life (for those who wish to do so). I plan, editors willing, to do more of that in future fiction.
So saith Ed. Illuminating the design backrooms of the Realms and D&D® for us all.
love,
THO
I think it's odd that cheating death and becoming one of the walking dead was deemed more morally acceptable than cloning. 
All the way on topic, verbal descriptions of most undead -- particularly liches -- always seem to emphasize that the body is in some stage of decomposition. I think it's reasonable to assume that any intelligent undead would seek to slow down their decomposition. It's also reasonable to assume that some forms of undead -- again, particularly liches -- have slowed decomposition to begin with, perhaps as a side effect of however they became undead. But the descriptions -- and the existence of demi-liches -- seem to imply that the process can be greatly slowed down, but not fully stopped. Finding a way to advance decomposition might be an interesting way to battle a lich... It's more difficult to cast spells when your lower jaw falls off and your fingers crumble to dust.
You could likely do some rule of thumb like say a lich would be around for 50 years per level, or something like that. That gives the possibility of liches sticking around for a long, long time, but still keeps them rotting away and their bodies eventually failing. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 01:49:59
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
While getting hold of ninemen is non-trivial, there are many other practical and personal reasons stopping mages from turning themselves into animated corpses.
Agreed--simply put, not everyone wants to be undead.
I don't want to be undead or dead dead either one! |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 22 Sep 2008 : 01:41:11
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
While getting hold of ninemen is non-trivial, there are many other practical and personal reasons stopping mages from turning themselves into animated corpses.
Agreed--simply put, not everyone wants to be undead. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 21 Sep 2008 : 20:52:05
Just as there are different kinds of liches (Larloch and Druth Daern are examples) there are different kinds of lichnee processes. We don't have dates for Nulathoe (also thought to have invented crawling claws) but there were liches before him; his ninemen probably replaced procedures that were lost or were more difficult than learning and casting a single 5th-level spell. |
| Gray Richardson |
Posted - 21 Sep 2008 : 14:55:28
quote:
Originally posted by Jamallo KreenDMs nota bene: No matter how often it appears in modules and game accessories Nulathoe's Ninemen is a "unique" spell. Typically fewer than 50 people know a "unique" spell which bears its creator's name unless the spell has become "common" (i.e. if it's in the PHB). Spells bearing the names of Nulathoe, Beltyn, and Agnazzar (among others, including The Simbul and Khelben Arunson) will typically only be known by their own apprentices and their closest associates (or to whomever steals their spellbooks and those who receive it "apostolically" from the thief). This explains why every magic-user doesn't opt for lichdom at the earliest possible moment -- if they don't know Nulathoe's Ninemen they can't make a proper phylactery.
There is evidence that devils can impart the secret of lichdom through their diabolical pact/contracting process. In Lords of Darkness it is revealed that the Archmage Arcane Arklem Greeth of the Arcane Brotherhood in Luskan had extended his lifespan far beyond its natural limits through use of wish spells and other magics, but was nearing the limits of what those stop-gap measures could do for him. He had been seeking the world for the secret of lichdom, traveling to Mulhorand, Thay, Zakhara and Kara-Tur, but to no avail. This affirms what Jamallo is saying, the secret of lichdom is very hard to discover, even for a very rich wizard with vast resources to search the globe. His old age might well have overtaken him in the period after he was (briefly) deposed as the Archmage had he not met Nyphithys, the erinyes who gave him the secret of lichdom that he sought, in exchange for the usual diabolic considerations.
In addition to a diabolic pact (other fiends may also be able to grant the secret) I would think that a sufficiently advanced wizard of epic levels should be able to research and recreate the process (or something like it) of lichdom on his own. Lichdom seems exactly the kind of thing that epic level magic should be able to let you discover through research. |
| Gray Richardson |
Posted - 21 Sep 2008 : 14:29:56
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_RoweThe Negative Material Plane hasn't had a writeup as yet in current cosmology. I imagine we'll learn more particulars in January with the release of Open Grave.
The Negative Energy Plane no longer exists, it has been folded into the Shadowfell, which is an amalgam of the Shadow Plane, The Negative Energy Plane.
The Shadowfell is now tied to undead and a source of the Necrotic Energy needed to animate them. I am not very sure of the details yet, but perhaps the forthcoming Manual of the Planes will enlighten us. |
| jordanz |
Posted - 21 Sep 2008 : 00:32:44
quote:
Originally posted by Jamallo Kreen
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
I have always taken undead lifespans to be as long as the magic that is animating them is active or they fall apart. Actually, it strikes me as odd that the Spellplague did not seem to effect undead creatures (from what I can tell) very much considering that they are completely kept together by magic. You would think that if it drove many mages insane, that it would have torn many undead (esp. liches) apart or just drained them of their unlife-sustaining energies. I just wish that they had applied actual logical properties and effects of the Spellplague rather than using it as their end-all catalyst for their changes without explaining the "why" of it. But I digress...
If anyone had thought -- at all -- your conclusion would have been absolutely correct. But they didn't think.... Aaaargh! ... Must. Not. Rant.... 
Lords of Darkness declares, on page 75, that a "pseudo-lich" can only survive for a maximum of 100 years; liches may keep going for as long as they successfully cast Nulathoe's Ninemen on their phylactery on a regular basis, but each time the lich's life force enters the phylactery upon the destruction of a host body it loses one experience level, which results in its destruction at level 0 (but I think that the ability to cast Nulathoe's Ninemen may be lost earlier than that if it is not one of the lich's "permanent"spells -- that's how I'd run it, at least); the typical duration of a lich's existence (let's not say "lifespan," shall we?) is stated to be about 900 years, but one lich is reported to be 3000 years old (and Serpent Kingdoms tells us that "King Oreme" is vastly older, but "he" hibernates periodically).
The same page states explicitly that, "Demi-lichdom is not a state that can be deliberately chosen or prepared for; why and how it occurs to some liches and not to others remains a mystery...."
DMs nota bene: No matter how often it appears in modules and game accessories Nulathoe's Ninemen is a "unique" spell. Typically fewer than 50 people know a "unique" spell which bears its creator's name unless the spell has become "common" (i.e. if it's in the PHB). Spells bearing the names of Nulathoe, Beltyn, and Agnazzar (among others, including The Simbul and Khelben Arunson) will typically only be known by their own apprentices and their closest associates (or to whomever steals their spellbooks and those who receive it "apostolically" from the thief). This explains why every magic-user doesn't opt for lichdom at the earliest possible moment -- if they don't know Nulathoe's Ninemen they can't make a proper phylactery.
It is important to remember that undead are creations of the DM. They don't have to be "like the one in the book." Ed Greenwood repeatedly emphasizes that they can be anything the DM wants them to be, with powers and abilities and weaknesses unique to each one of them, if the DM so wills. Thus, much "sage advice" that the PCs receive will be flat-out wrong. A gimmick which worked on one undead someplace may not work on the same type of undead there or somewhere else. Moreover, some "sage advice" is a deliberate lie, such as the dis-information which appears in the Lords of Darkness chapter about spectres.
-- Jamallo Kreen, Friend of Religion,
who isn't a necromancer, but who knows one
900 years on average? Hmmm can't say I'm too impressed... What about Vamps and ghouls, and non corporeal undead. It seems like this has never been answered squarely. |
| Jamallo Kreen |
Posted - 20 Sep 2008 : 20:45:25
I bow before Faraer's strong-marshaled lore!
|
| Jamallo Kreen |
Posted - 20 Sep 2008 : 20:26:49
The Van Richten's Guide to ... series is excellent! The information is setting-specific, but one can draw some multiversally valid assumptions about "monsters" from them. Van Richten's suggestions that not all undead are "typical" is exactly what Ed has said about undead in the Realms, so I'd say that DMs should feel free to plunder the Guide series, if one bears in mind that anything which says, "in the Domain of Dread ..." or something similar applies only to the Ravenloft campaign setting.
As discussed on a few other scrolls recently, Ravenloft's elven vampire, Jander Sunstar, is from Faerun, and his biography gives the fullest explanation which I have seen as to how Daggerdale" acquired its sinister name. Further, one of the domains is essentially a tharch of Thay (Gauros), and its lichly lord is the tharcion.
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 20 Sep 2008 : 20:14:23
quote:
Originally posted by Jamallo Kreen
DMs nota bene: No matter how often it appears in modules and game accessories Nulathoe's Ninemen is a "unique" spell. Typically fewer than 50 people know a "unique" spell which bears its creator's name unless the spell has become "common" (i.e. if it's in the PHB). Spells bearing the names of Nulathoe, Beltyn, and Agnazzar (among others, including The Simbul and Khelben Arunson) will typically only be known by their own apprentices and their closest associates (or to whomever steals their spellbooks and those who receive it "apostolically" from the thief).
Where's it said to be 'unique'? Forgotten Realms Adventures pegs it as 'rare'. Also, phrasing like "Typically a Veladar's vambrace or holy might spell is cast on inorganic pieces and a Nulathoe's ninemen on organic components" in VGATM suggest that N's n is somewhat widespread. Ed gave us a useful guideline in 2005:quote:
[M]ost of these spells would, in CCG terms, be “Uncommon” to “Rare” unless they are of very low level and non-harmful (i.e. can be used to enhance a ‘helpful’ reputation of those who use the Art, rather than being used as weapons). Such magics are usually distributed primarily through apprentices of the famous mages who crafted them, and then slowly spread through sales, thefts, and trades of magic. Joining the Watchful Order of Magists in Waterdeep would get you ready access to most of the non-combat ones, as would becoming a trusted Harper who ‘runs with’ the right NPC Harpers.
Many of the 'named' spells have had centuries to spread in this manner. Whereas there are spells specified as known only by the creator, close friends and apprentices; the spell list in The Seven Sisters makes a similar distinction.
As a side note, the FRA frequency guidelines aren't that reliable. They don't closely match the frequency of Player's Handbook spells in published Realms spell rosters; and the random spell frequency table fails to account for how many thousands of unpublished 'rare' spells there are.quote:
This explains why every magic-user doesn't opt for lichdom at the earliest possible moment -- if they don't know Nulathoe's Ninemen they can't make a proper phylactery.
While getting hold of ninemen is non-trivial, there are many other practical and personal reasons stopping mages from turning themselves into animated corpses. |
| Jamallo Kreen |
Posted - 20 Sep 2008 : 19:38:17
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
I have always taken undead lifespans to be as long as the magic that is animating them is active or they fall apart. Actually, it strikes me as odd that the Spellplague did not seem to effect undead creatures (from what I can tell) very much considering that they are completely kept together by magic. You would think that if it drove many mages insane, that it would have torn many undead (esp. liches) apart or just drained them of their unlife-sustaining energies. I just wish that they had applied actual logical properties and effects of the Spellplague rather than using it as their end-all catalyst for their changes without explaining the "why" of it. But I digress...
If anyone had thought -- at all -- your conclusion would have been absolutely correct. But they didn't think.... Aaaargh! ... Must. Not. Rant....
Lords of Darkness declares, on page 75, that a "pseudo-lich" can only survive for a maximum of 100 years; liches may keep going for as long as they successfully cast Nulathoe's Ninemen on their phylactery on a regular basis, but each time the lich's life force enters the phylactery upon the destruction of a host body it loses one experience level, which results in its destruction at level 0 (but I think that the ability to cast Nulathoe's Ninemen may be lost earlier than that if it is not one of the lich's "permanent"spells -- that's how I'd run it, at least); the typical duration of a lich's existence (let's not say "lifespan," shall we?) is stated to be about 900 years, but one lich is reported to be 3000 years old (and Serpent Kingdoms tells us that "King Oreme" is vastly older, but "he" hibernates periodically).
The same page states explicitly that, "Demi-lichdom is not a state that can be deliberately chosen or prepared for; why and how it occurs to some liches and not to others remains a mystery...."
DMs nota bene: No matter how often it appears in modules and game accessories Nulathoe's Ninemen is a "unique" spell. Typically fewer than 50 people know a "unique" spell which bears its creator's name unless the spell has become "common" (i.e. if it's in the PHB). Spells bearing the names of Nulathoe, Beltyn, and Agnazzar (among others, including The Simbul and Khelben Arunson) will typically only be known by their own apprentices and their closest associates (or to whomever steals their spellbooks and those who receive it "apostolically" from the thief). This explains why every magic-user doesn't opt for lichdom at the earliest possible moment -- if they don't know Nulathoe's Ninemen they can't make a proper phylactery.
It is important to remember that undead are creations of the DM. They don't have to be "like the one in the book." Ed Greenwood repeatedly emphasizes that they can be anything the DM wants them to be, with powers and abilities and weaknesses unique to each one of them, if the DM so wills. Thus, much "sage advice" that the PCs receive will be flat-out wrong. A gimmick which worked on one undead someplace may not work on the same type of undead there or somewhere else. Moreover, some "sage advice" is a deliberate lie, such as the dis-information which appears in the Lords of Darkness chapter about spectres.
-- Jamallo Kreen, Friend of Religion,
who isn't a necromancer, but who knows one
|
| Ikki |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 22:39:59
Liches go demilich at epic.. just to become super powerful ;)
Besides its neat to have summon monsters at will.. ie daos and djinnis -> castles in a few minutes and all filled with finery.. and then some teleporting nasties by the dozens to attack enemies.
In the meantime they can suck souls, get a vast improvment in fighting, even more immunities, insight to attack and ac.. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 18:47:27
I have always taken undead lifespans to be as long as the magic that is animating them is active or they fall apart. Actually, it strikes me as odd that the Spellplague did not seem to effect undead creatures (from what I can tell) very much considering that they are completely kept together by magic. You would think that if it drove many mages insane, that it would have torn many undead (esp. liches) apart or just drained them of their unlife-sustaining energies. I just wish that they had applied actual logical properties and effects of the Spellplague rather than using it as their end-all catalyst for their changes without explaining the "why" of it. But I digress... |
| jordanz |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 18:15:34
I remember reading some where that the negative energy that powers most undead, can wane over time. I think it was in reference for a LICH who would need to extend his existance and would therefore attempt to become a demilich. |
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 17:51:47
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
...the key to undeath was always the connection to the Negative Material Plane. It was that connection that ultimately kept the undead "alive" (as it were), and as long as it's not severed, they will continue to exist.
The Negative Material Plane hasn't had a writeup as yet in current cosmology. I imagine we'll learn more particulars in January with the release of Open Grave.
For now, the definition of undead in the Monster Manual provides more hints (in terms of this question) than it does answers:
"Undead are not living creatures; spells and effects that specifically target living creatures do not work against them. Most undead have resistance to necrotic damage, are immune to poison, and are vulnerable to radiant damage. Undead do not need to breathe or sleep." (MM glossary p. 283)
|
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 16:09:37
I think their "unlife" span should vary according to the type of undead.
Of course, what good (or bad) is immortality if you can still die if you fall on a wooden stake or ingest silver?
|
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 14:32:04
Interesting question. Undead don't specifically have the "immortal" keyword, which is reserved for "creatures...native to the Astral Sea" and includes "angels, devils, and other creatures with strong ties to the gods. They do not age or die of natural causes." (Monster Manual glossary p. 282)
That said, a couple of individual descriptions cast some light. "Some ghosts[,]" for example, "are inexorably linked to the world, reforming at full strength a few days after being 'destroyed.'" (MM p. 117) And, per your example, vampires (or vampire lords, at least) are "[g]ifted and cursed with undead immortality..." (MM p. 258)
Complicating all this, of course, is the impulse to apply RW style "logic" to these fantasy critters. If they're dead and immortal, why do some of them hunger (as with vampires), or even "evolve...over time" (as with wraiths)? |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 19 Sep 2008 : 14:20:44
As far as i know, not 100% sure thou, Udeads are immortal, thats why some wizards resort to lichdom. But as I said, not 100% sure. Especially about summoned undead! |
|
|
