| Author |
 Topic  |
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 13:14:12
|
I was a bit suprised after skipping through the 5e Monster Manual with the Lich and Demilich changes.
Liches now need to feed their phylacteries souls to keep its magic working that preserves his undead body and consciousness. It also states that the soul of the lich will be drawn to the phylactery after creating it and will stay there until it is destroyed. I find that very confusing because it indicates that you can destroy the lich by destroying his phylactery while the lich is still running around. In earlier editions the soul only traveled to the phylactery when the lich was destroyed, until he reformed again. So if you destroyed his phylactery while the lich is still active he could just create a new one. But later the 5e MM says that the destruction of a phylactery only means the possibility to the lichs eternal dead too. Where does the soul goes in this situation?
But the most problems I have with the demilich changes. Because now demiliches are not some kind of even more powerfull lich but the state that happens when a lich doesn't feed souls to its phylactery where he slowly starts to wither away until he is completly destroyed. I don't see any reasons for such a drastic change. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 16:38:05
|
| Another prime example of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
 |
|
|
Delwa
Master of Realmslore
USA
1271 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 17:26:04
|
I hadn't noticed the change, thank you for pointing it out.
My first observation is that changing the lore on the lich and the demilich won't change the mechanics or CR of either creature's stat block, so if you prefer the older way, cheers!
My second observation was that the demiliches description notes that few liches choose to become demiliches because it means giving up the existence they hoped to preserve by becoming undead. That leads me to wonder why someone would choose. It gets my creative juices going and makes me think about the motives of the creature, not just "he's big, bad, and powerful." It helps me build background.
|
- Delwa Aunglor
I am off to slay yon refrigerator and spoil it's horde. Go for the cheese, Boo!
"The Realms change; seldom at the speed desired of those who strive, but far too quickly for those who resist." - The Simbul, taken from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Conspectus |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 17:50:45
|
I'm not going to defend the changes... But "demi" usually means something that is lesser, not something more... And demiliches were originally described as being physically less than liches, and relatively inactive. So, from that perspective, I like the idea that a demilich is less than a regular lich.
Of course, as I've made clear in the past, I'm also a huge fan of continuity, so I usually have an unfavorable view of anything that retcons prior canon. (Unless it's fixing serious issues with existing lore)
If it were up to me, I'd've left demiliches alone, and instead intro'ed a third type of lich, the one described here -- a fallen lich, perhaps, whose magic has given out and is dwindling away.
As for the soul-eating thing... No. Keep that to hags and fiends and Cryx. Leave my regular liches alone. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Korginard
Learned Scribe
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 17:54:29
|
I didn't think Lich's choose to be a Demi-lich, per older material (3.5 and before) I understood that a Demi-Lich was a Lich that grew so old that the magic holding it together failed or twisted somehow, causing the transformation into a skull rather than a full boddied Lich. Along with this came a shift in focus from the material world to other planes. The Demi-Lich would basically "Space out" and send it's awareness elsewhere until someone disturbed it, at which point you got floaty Skull sucking up everyones soul. I'm pretty sure the first Demi-Lich was Acerak, introduced in Vault of Horrors. (First one published, not necesarilly the first one historically)
I may need to pull out the old Van Richten's Guide. I still think those were some of the best books regarding undead, regardless of if you were using Ravenloft as a setting or not. |
|
|
|
Delwa
Master of Realmslore
USA
1271 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 19:13:30
|
I do want to note that I'm unfamiliar with prior lore on liches and Demiliches. The note on the prefix demi does make sense, I hadn't realized that. I do agree that the soul eating thing is kinda meh. I don't like the idea of a lich being vulnerable to its own neglect in that way.
I like what Koginard noted about 3.5 liches being decayed liches, I just don't 5e's "how they decay" idea.
|
- Delwa Aunglor
I am off to slay yon refrigerator and spoil it's horde. Go for the cheese, Boo!
"The Realms change; seldom at the speed desired of those who strive, but far too quickly for those who resist." - The Simbul, taken from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Conspectus |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1847 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 19:48:16
|
Wizbro just doesn't get it. All this retconning just serves to alienate those of us who've been around the game for a long time while those new to the game generally won't care. In the future, those 'new' players will be us...and complaining about [insert company that holds the IP at that time here] changes made to 'their' Realms.
Circle of Life and all that... |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 19:55:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
My first observation is that changing the lore on the lich and the demilich won't change the mechanics or CR of either creature's stat block, so if you prefer the older way, cheers!
Actually that's the problem. In 5e it's a lesser, crippled version of a lich in terms of mechanics and CR.
If you would like to restore it to it's former lore you would need to beef up it's mechanics |
|
|
|
Korginard
Learned Scribe
USA
126 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 20:35:21
|
The Soul-Eating that a Demi-Lich did in previous editions didn't sustain it either I don't think. I think it was more of an Insta-death just for spite attack. It WAS the Tomb of Horrors after all.. you couldn't get thru all of those marvelous traps and just WIN. There had to be a terrible instant death machine at the end.
You have to admit it's a more decent fate than having your character stick his head in the mouth (AKA Sphere of Anihalation) in the wall to see what was in there...
(Or even worse, having the whole party crushed to death just for choosing the wrong enterence.. GOD that dungeon was vindictive!) |
|
|
|
Delwa
Master of Realmslore
USA
1271 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2015 : 21:20:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
My first observation is that changing the lore on the lich and the demilich won't change the mechanics or CR of either creature's stat block, so if you prefer the older way, cheers!
Actually that's the problem. In 5e it's a lesser, crippled version of a lich in terms of mechanics and CR.
If you would like to restore it to it's former lore you would need to beef up it's mechanics
Not really. It's already done for you. In the sidebar on page 49, it tells you how to make a CR 21 Demilich (23 in Lair) by adding a single ability.
That equals the Lich in CR outside the lair, beats it inside the lair. |
- Delwa Aunglor
I am off to slay yon refrigerator and spoil it's horde. Go for the cheese, Boo!
"The Realms change; seldom at the speed desired of those who strive, but far too quickly for those who resist." - The Simbul, taken from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Conspectus |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 00:30:40
|
A demilich in the older editions was a badass lich who no longer cared about the Prime Material plane and was off visiting other planes and worlds soaking up as much knowledge as possible. All of it's teeth were gems that held souls when the demilich used his "Trap the Soul" ability.
Wizards always manages to screw up something. |
“Fantasy is escapist, and that is its glory. If a soldier is imprisioned by the enemy, don't we consider it his duty to escape?. . .If we value the freedom of mind and soul, if we're partisans of liberty, then it's our plain duty to escape, and to take as many people with us as we can!”
#8213; J.R.R. Tolkien
*I endorse everything Dark Wizard says*. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 03:13:56
|
The changes sound more like changes for change's sake. This brings nothing improved to the table, only sows confusion. 
While "demi-" means half, like demi-human or demi-god, I figured demi-lich was piggypacking on the allure of the latter term, as in something more than a lich. Almost like the lich has endured for so long they were near ascension to another level of undeath, a lich demi-god.
What it should refer to is the result of the 'lichloved concept' from the old BoVD. 
Demihuman is also a weird term, I'm sure the other races don't think of themselves as "less than human" or "half a human." Though this may go back to ancient beliefs that fey, elves, and the like didn't have souls.
Take that concept to a dark conclusion and that would make a scary setting. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 04:48:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
The changes sound more like changes for change's sake.
I'd assumed the changes were made as a result of feedback from one of the numerous surveys WotC conducted on their website about various aspects of the game (including monsters).
I don't recall a specific survey related to liches, however, as I did not participate in all of them. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 27 Aug 2015 04:48:22 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 05:38:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
The changes sound more like changes for change's sake.
I'd assumed the changes were made as a result of feedback from one of the numerous surveys WotC conducted on their website about various aspects of the game (including monsters).
I don't recall a specific survey related to liches, however, as I did not participate in all of them.
We could assume that, but we'd never know. It doesn't have to be a survey question, but could be a comment made a couple of times that the design collective thought made sense.
User feedback even 'caused' the death of Tyr during early 4E. It didn't take a lot, apparently. Plant an idea in the designer's head, and if they like it enough, easily done.
I can see their logic, using the "demi-" meaning half or lesser prefix to redefine the demilich, but it plays havoc with older lore of demiliches being transcendental undead. Now they're just more-withered liches. It even required a sidebar to explain I see.
All in all, confusing and pointless. It's not like numbering prefixes are always set in stone. Recall the ambiguous meaning of "bimonthly," which was even joked about on an older episode of the Simpsons.
Perhaps the 'demi-' portion isn't even the demi- we're used it. With so many made up words used for monsters, who knows what it could mean. We're just used to our familiar demi-.
"How wrong we were to underestimate the 'poor' demilich. We? I mean me. I was the ... lucky one. The demilich left my soul intact so I would warn you, all of you. Never disturb the grounds or Blackfire Crypt, not you, or your children, or your descendants an entire age from now. The crypt's master ponders within, pondering, always pondering. And if it had the urging, with a twinkle of its unblinking bejeweled eye, it would vanish you with just another thought... You, your children, your descendants an entire age from now, gone in a single thought." |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 06:08:18
|
Well, I for one don't mind. I had always thought the prefix 'demi' was confusing. And we already had an uber-lich, the archlich, but they used that term to desribe a good lich (and then there are the baelnorns, which are already a type of good lich), etc, etc...
So I am making a guess that after some 40 years of 'getting it wrong' they've decided to clean-up the terminology, and I would hazard to guess that an 'archlich' will now be the uber-lich (old-school lich), so you will have the lich (ancient dead), the demi-lich (one thats falling apart), and the Archlich... which should take the place of the old demi-lich, being a superior variety that fed properly.
And as for 'good' liches, we will still have Baelnorn. By now humans will have learned the process, yada, yada, yada, and they will be the old arch (good) lich. All based covered, Confusing to us (maybe) but not someone new coming into the game.
Of course, someone might think a demi-lich was someone who failed at their lich-creating ritual... but that would a be a half-lich, wouldn't it?
So here's the thing - if a lich is able to become 'uber' and become an archlich, and then for whatever reason it wasn't able to get souls anymore (would an archlich even need souls?), then we could wind up with an archdemilich, or in other words, an old-school demi-lich. Any that are in the canon lore can be one of those.
"Hey guys, look! A skull! Must be one of those weak demi-liches!"
"Ummmm... why does THAT ONE have gems for teeth?"
"I don't know... maybe it... uhhh... why is starting to hover and glow?
"Guys? GUYS?!" Arrrrrgh!!!!"
Like I said, I don't see this as a bad thing - they are just house-cleaning 40 years of glut and bad terminology. Remember when they got rid of the mummy? Because a (greater) mummy was really nothing more then a lich created with positive (divine) energy, and the lesser mummy was really nothing more then an uber-zombie? We didn't need those extra creatures because they were already covered by other creatures (especially when they got rid of the notion that undead could be created with positive energy - another confusing thing i was glad they got rid of in 3e). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Aug 2015 06:10:16 |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 06:28:37
|
It's really just going to create confusion.
If liches sustain themselves by devouring souls, how then do archliches and baelnorns sustain their undeath? They use, after all, negative energy, the Weave, and "mostly the same process" to get there. If archliches only use magic and never souls, and there's no risk to not using souls, why would any evil lich put themselves at such a disadvantage by transforming to a lesser form of lich?
Completely off-the-wall side thought: with Larloch effectively gone and his servitor liches free to do their own thing for the first time in ages, what about liches like Rhaugilath the Ageless who was a lawful good archlich? Surely he would not now need to consume souls to maintain his archlichdom.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 06:35:58
|
A non-uber (and not Uber using, but maybe Lyft) negative-energy celestial dire miniature space terran arboreal pit-spawned heaven-sent fiendish enlightened tenebrous pseudo-amorphous feytouched lichloved (but not in the self-lichy way) half-construct dragonborn (the old kind with a human base) spell-stitched living dark saint fallen chosen anti-arch-demilich (but not the other demi kind of demi, and the uber-arch kind of arch).
Got it.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Or maybe It's a Trap!
To catch the noobs off guard.
DM says: "Did I say you could read the Monster Manual? Serves you right."
They messed with the mummy too?
Watch 6E have like four monsters: basher, spellflinger, backstabber, and booster. Just renamed and plus/minus some hit dice. Then again, it's sounding like a dumb down 4E. |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1847 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 07:51:10
|
Okay I can go with MT's thoughts on the topic. Cleaning up the terminology isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm just concerned that in another 5-10 years they'll want to 'clean up' again...and give us the same old terminology.
There used to be a site (can't recall the name but I'm sure it is now defunct) that had this notion of 'levels' of liches. Van Richten's Guide to Liches touched on this somewhat, but the site I'm referring too went further than Van Richten...MUCH FURTHER. And it was a good site for such things. If memory serves me, I believe the lich-queen that rules the githyanki was the most supreme form of lich under their system.
Anyone recall such a site and where that information might now be found? |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 10:02:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
Actually that's the problem. In 5e it's a lesser, crippled version of a lich in terms of mechanics and CR.
If you would like to restore it to it's former lore you would need to beef up it's mechanics
Not really. It's already done for you. In the sidebar on page 49, it tells you how to make a CR 21 Demilich (23 in Lair) by adding a single ability.
That equals the Lich in CR outside the lair, beats it inside the lair.
It doesn't even come close to the old demilich.
Because previously a lich choose to become a demilich and could then create 8 soul gems. Into these soul gems he could trap other creatures souls (like the normal lich can now with his phylactery). The soul gems also act as a phylactery each, so you have to destroy them and the phylactery to destroy the lich or he will reform.
Also the demilich keeps all abilities and feats (like spellcasting) it had as a lich. The new lich monster in the MM doesn't seem to be able to cast spells. But on the other hand the interesting part, how to create a lich or a demilich and how to apply their templates to a character is missing in the new monster manual. So maybe the new demilich doesn't loose its spellcasting and other stuff neither. |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6361 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 12:33:33
|
I'm also fine with this change rather surprisingly (even though I will never use 5e).
I also recall Demi liches having their body degenerated so they were only a skull. Shoon was a Demi lich that became trapped in his book and he had no soul gems. In fact since his escape he was noted as being much freer and happier so the Demi lich state may have been unintentional and inhibitory.
I'm working on my own rules and when I look at monsters now I see that the stat blocks we receive are just an average example of that creature, but some monsters should never be an average. Liches are always exceptional and I envisage each liches creation method as being unique and so those soul gems are probably just one ability a single lich managed to acquire.
For me a Demi lich as a lich that decayed (for whatever reason including inadequate feeding) makes perfect sense. The liches soul is tied into an object, a soul is some mystical force that connects living creatures to positive energy which gives them life. A lich wraps that in some kind of negative energy trap (phylactery) to stop himself dying. Unfortunately that trap slowly leaches his soul of its power and over time he will change into something both less and more.
Less is the loss of a physical body, more is a greater connection to the negative plane and an ability to bleed through planar barriers.
Eating souls seems like a good way to recharge your soul battery and keep yourself in a physical body.
As for arch liches and baelnorn, I never liked that elves used undeath and negative energy, nor do I like negative energy and goodness. So assuming you can have too much of a good thing, what if you can be killed by an overdose of positive energy. What if like a lich you can also trap your soul so you don't die, but this time you trap your soul with positive energy which reinforces and nourishes it (the opposite of what a lichs phylactery does)
The end result is still that you die and become a lich, but the method is different and explains some differences. It's something I'm considering for when I design monsters but for liches no two shoul ever be the same. |
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
GungHo
Seeker
USA
68 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 14:26:37
|
While I don't mind the idea of a lich doing the whole Shang Tsung thing to power some extraordinary abilities, it seems like a weird twist to the formula that actually seems throws a lot of the various lore into whack. Many descriptions of liches (not just FR) have them choosing lichdom to continue studying dark magic in peace. Yeah, they're evil, but they're not going around looking for villages to eat. That's the vampire's domain.
Demiliches represented those liches that are so ancient that even the power of their magic has been unable to fend off the decay of ages. They aren't "lesser liches", though, power-wise. They've still got all their built up magical power. They're "lesser" liches because they've lost their physicality and perhaps are deranged (or simply becoming "unfettered" in the case of those who partake in extreme astral and ethereal projection). |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 17:08:49
|
I once commented on undeath not being the most viable form of immortality, and got a response from Ed...
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
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2015 : 17:32:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
It's really just going to create confusion.
If liches sustain themselves by devouring souls, how then do archliches and baelnorns sustain their undeath? They use, after all, negative energy, the Weave, and "mostly the same process" to get there. If archliches only use magic and never souls, and there's no risk to not using souls, why would any evil lich put themselves at such a disadvantage by transforming to a lesser form of lich?
Well, my point was we would have something like this...
Half-lich: Half-dead (failed lich), or something akin to a 'Shade', which could still become very powerful.
Lich: sentient undead, usually with magical powers (unless granted accidental lichdom)
Demi-Lich: 'Broken' Lich - one which couldn't find a power-source (souls) to feed upon
Archlich: A lich that has evolved to the epic tier. may need to feed less, or not feed at all
Baelnorn: A divine lich, taking the place of both an Ancient Dead (greater mummy) and the old archlich. Not necessarily 'good' (because 'good' is arbitrary based on ones morality and culture). They were raised to lichdom with the help of a god, and thus do not require sustenance... but at a price. They serve under a geis to perform one task without fail for all eternity (usually 'guarding' something, which gives them a lot of down-time). If they stop performing said task, they fall into demilich status.
Feeding: everything needs to feed, otherwise how does it maintain itself? Even magic needs logic. HOWEVER, different forms of sustenance fulfill the requirements differently. You 'eat' a PC/NPC, you are good for a number of months = (level²). A lich that spends his time munching on peasants isn't going to have a lot of time to do much else. That would become annoying. An archlich may still need to feed, but if he is eating other 'epic' characters (level 25?), he is good for 52 years!!!
Now, if an archlich got trapped somehow, or was otherwise unable to perform his bi-century feeding of an uber-PC/NPC, he would become an arch-demilich, which would be the same as the old demilich, and we have no problem. On the other hand, if an archlich were to feed on an immortal - say a demigod - that may sustain them indefinitely, I would imagine, or at least, so long as the deity still had followers... which would be a VERY interesting scenario - imagine a lich with a divine soul trapped within him (in a tooth?), that has to occasionally either 'appear as' or 'grant prayers' to the quasi-dead deity's faithful. That would be annoying.
And that could explain Larloch, and other uber-liches. If Larloch was indeed a 'Chosen' (as we suspect), then his own soul should have been enough for him to avoid the feeding (and also give him a geis, BTW).
Sometimes we have to go through a little pain to make things better. Its called evolving, and even RPGs have to do it. I guess the reason why I am in favor of this decision is because I already put a LOT of thought into souls, liches, phylactories, soul cages (including sentient artifacts), etc, etc... and found the lore wanting. It needed to be cleaned-up and meshed together for a long time now. In the new setting I am working on, I've even gone so far as to fold 'familiars' into all of that (familiars require a 'shard' of a soul to create).
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 28 Aug 2015 19:39:44 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1847 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 00:01:46
|
I love your musings on this MT. My only hiccup is I'd keep baelnorn as a form of undead unique to elves. They are created through High Magic and can still be 'virtually' the same thing as an Ancient Dead/Mummy...but should have some differences that make them elven.
I prefer each baelnorn to be unique in that their transformation taps into their psyche and transforms each of them into something different (for the most part) than from other baelnorn. Hence, you get the one baelnorn that had a mithril body (or mithril appearing body). I would assume that most look like typical baelnorn...but they each have power unique to them (i.e. the DM creates each one individually based on how he/she sees that specific NPC).
I'd also keep the notion that a lich can rise in power through its research (I'm still trying to find something regarding the website I asked about earlier as it had some decent rules for the process back in 2e days). So a lich can become an archlich (as you already stated)...but can rise even higher (as the website I mentioned had them doing). |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 01:18:09
|
I'm simply just not going to use their rule.
Done. |
“Fantasy is escapist, and that is its glory. If a soldier is imprisioned by the enemy, don't we consider it his duty to escape?. . .If we value the freedom of mind and soul, if we're partisans of liberty, then it's our plain duty to escape, and to take as many people with us as we can!”
#8213; J.R.R. Tolkien
*I endorse everything Dark Wizard says*. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 02:52:23
|
Don't mine the codification. It makes things easy like color coded dragons (but we all know the characters who will gain the most traction will end up bucking this hierarchy in some way). Did feel there was room enough and allowance enough for them to work with the old system rather than rewrite it. The terminology inconsistency could have made for an interesting snippet of lore (and kind of did for decades, but perhaps underdeveloped).
Superlich, Uberlich, even Archlich, just doesn't have the same ring as Demilich in all its glorious oddity with the implied but counter-intuitive meaning. It's the weird (but not too weird) ones that make themselves stand out. |
|
|
|
Cyrinishad
Learned Scribe
300 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 18:22:12
|
I know I'm one of the strange ones that generally enjoys changes in the functionality of creatures and magic over time, since it lets me brainstorm on various in-game scenarios and storylines to give a rationale for the change (even when the changes are bizarre or arbitrary or related to marketing decisions).
In this instance I actually think these changes are a big improvement over previous representations of Liches & Demiliches. The need to feed on souls gives Liches a reason to be engaged in the game-world, just like Vampires. I even think it makes Liches more consistent with the lore surrounding how liches were created in the first place. Aren't some Liches the result of a failed ascension to godhood? Since gods also sustain themselves on the divine energy generated by the souls of their worshippers, it makes sense to me that a Lich would also sustain themselves on the energy of souls (albeit in a more horrific way).
It is also worth noting that this change in the functionality of Liches coincides with the return of Myrkul to the realms... I think I am going to make a connection between these two events in my home campaign.
Edit Note: I consider the Lich presented in the Monster Manual to be the "Generic Evil" version of a Lich. I expect that Archliches, Baelnorns, Alhoons, etc. will have other mechanisms to sustain their magic, when their new stat blocks are published. |
To know, is to know that you know nothing. That is the meaning of true knowledge. -Socrates
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened. -Dr. Seuss |
Edited by - Cyrinishad on 28 Aug 2015 18:23:42 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 19:11:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cyrinishad
Aren't some Liches the result of a failed ascension to godhood?
I'm not familiar with any lore to that effect. Most of the lore I'm familiar with says that regular liches are folks that don't want to let death get in the way of their various magical studies.
Similarly, some of the variant liches are not letting death get in the way of other goals, which aren't necessarily selfish ones (which is the default assumption for a regular lich). Instead, they embrace undeath to stick around and watch over families, specific locales, keep something from falling into the wrong hands, etc. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 19:57:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
I love your musings on this MT. My only hiccup is I'd keep baelnorn as a form of undead unique to elves. They are created through High Magic and can still be 'virtually' the same thing as an Ancient Dead/Mummy...but should have some differences that make them elven.
Fair enough...
Call the human 'good' (more like 'neutral') 'Mumia', or even Urlich (I like the sound of that). Not a fan of 'mummy', since thats not really a specific type of creature; the greater ones were all different (just like liches), and the lesser ones were just very strong zombies. All of them can be called 'Ancient dead' (even though some of them aren't really all that ancient, like Szass Tam).
Just keep 'Baelnorn' for the Elves. I'm still going to say (IMG) that the Urlich was derived from the Elven Baelnorn (a person elevated to undead status through divine agencies).
And everything can level, as far as I am concerned. I think only in 2e Ravenloft RAW did it say they couldn't level, and then, I think that only applied to (certain?) Domain Lords.
Theoretically, even an unintelligent undead can be 'awakened', either by some sort of magic, or just by surviving long enough (its also how I picture the Warforged/Basal golems 'awakening'). If we go back to the origial (Ed) FR premise that Life = Magic, which ties into the 1e/2e premise that you had to give up a little 'lifeforce' to create permanent magic items, then "soul energy' = Life-force = magic = that which empowers magical automata, which would include non intelligent undead. That tiny little 'shard' of life-force (soul energy) that gets placed inside anything you crate has the possibility of growing (like a seed) into a full-blown sentience (basically, a proto-soul).
So a lesser mummy thats been hanging around a tomb for a few thousand years can 'evolve' into a greater mummy eventually. It probably wouldn't have any memories of its former life at that point, but it may decide to 'better itself' (gain levels in something). The world is an organic place, and just like the rest of the rules, the MM is only a book full of 'suggestions'.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 20:24:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Cyrinishad
Aren't some Liches the result of a failed ascension to godhood?
I'm not familiar with any lore to that effect. Most of the lore I'm familiar with says that regular liches are folks that don't want to let death get in the way of their various magical studies.
I believe you guys may be thinking of one of those 'atropal' things from 3e. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 28 Aug 2015 20:25:19 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2015 : 20:30:35
|
Atropal are 'stillborn' godlings (though the lore is purposefully* fuzzy on that), as opposed to a mortal trying, and failing, to ascend.
* I think the designers wanted the imagery of undead aborted god-fetuses, but didn't want to touch upon the more controversial terminology, so settled for the atropals we got. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Liches & Demiliches in 5e
