| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 05 Apr 2012 : 12:35:01
Hi everyone. Wow it has been quite a while since I have graced the halls of Candlekeep and this is a little something that has been on my mind for quite a while. My favourite creature is of course the Lich. Something about the quest for immortality whatever the cost, to exist forever, unless adventurers come calling, somewhat pulls at my mortality.
After rereading Gauntlgrym, especially segments about Arklem Greeth or rather his phylactery, I was wondering why hasn't he come back, by all necromantic means, in one to ten days he would surely have regrown a new body to inhabit, so what gives?! (Also the whole Robillard using the Shocking Grasp spell to kill him was a bit bogus)
P.S This scroll can be used to ask anything about liches, their types, ecology etc. Knowing as they say is half the transformation into one, to paraphrase from my point of view. Enjoy |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Quale |
Posted - 02 Mar 2013 : 17:33:02
Liches crumble into demiliches
Weird liches I'd like to see: dhampir (half), arcane (space-lich), spellweaver (Jergal's high priests), kaorti (from Imaskar), sharn (from a universe that fell to entropy or to the elder elemental evil), vaati (void duke). |
| Dennis |
Posted - 02 Mar 2013 : 14:44:51
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The Shades have some sort of lichdom attached to them. If I were to put it into 4e lingo, the heroic tier are your standard fodder (MM) shades. I think of these guys as 'half dead'. The paragon tier are like three-quarters dead. I would expect some sort of vampire-like abilities (not necessarily the same as a vampire - I am thinking power-level wise). the final tier should be 100% dead, like telemont and the Princes (there is a scene in RotAW where someone see them as they truly are - little more then eyes and a couple of organs floating in the air).
There's a big difference, though: the "vessel" that holds their "soul." Shades' bodies would deteriorate eventually, albeit slowly, probably three millenniums at most. On the hand, the liches' bones are eternal; they wouldn't crumble to dusts so long as the layers and layers of spells that hold them together remain active. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Mar 2013 : 01:49:14
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The paragon tier are like three-quarters dead. I would expect some sort of vampire-like abilities (not necessarily the same as a vampire - I am thinking power-level wise).
Very interesting.
How would you specifically define these vampire-like abilities, Markus? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 18:25:03
Larloch and Szass Tam, yes. Fairly cookie-cutter stuff, when all is said and done.
The other two go in interesting directions. At the end of the day, though, they were all human once.
The Shades have some sort of lichdom attached to them. If I were to put it into 4e lingo, the heroic tier are your standard fodder (MM) shades. I think of these guys as 'half dead'. The paragon tier are like three-quarters dead. I would expect some sort of vampire-like abilities (not necessarily the same as a vampire - I am thinking power-level wise). the final tier should be 100% dead, like telemont and the Princes (there is a scene in RotAW where someone see them as they truly are - little more then eyes and a couple of organs floating in the air).
So you'd have something like a wight (the basic shade), then a at paragoon level something like a vamp/lesser lich, and at epic level you have something like an ancient dead/demi-lich thing (swathed in shadows to conceal its true form).
So Shades qualify as 'out-of-the-box'... even though they too were once human. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 17:20:42
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Well, D&D has presented a vampire variant for every race; a few great ideas (I like dwarven vamps being able to meld into stone instead of going misty) but, as usual, carried to ridiculous D&D extremes of contrived symmetry. And elven baelnorn do suggest that other non-human lich types are possible. Indeed, I believe an ancient dwarven priest-lich can be found in the Undermountain: Stardock adventure.
I think the old 2E-era oppositional schools shouldn't be dismissed so easily, though. Becoming a lich may simply require access to necromantic magic without exception, and unfortunately that's not usually possible for illusionists. I also can't seriously imagine gnomish liches, although I do suppose they'd be able to fashion unsurpassed gemstone phylacteries. Halfling liches seem laughable and unlikely, especially since halfling clerics traditionally have a bit of a druidic view on things.
I agree on the halfling bit. It would be totally outside their societal view. The only way you'd have a halfling lich would be if he was a psycopath raised outside their society or something.... and generally that's not inclined toward the ordered paths necessary to achieve spellcasting greatness and more towards the nature of some kind of lunatic that...... hmmmm, where was Belkar Bitterleaf of "the order of the the stick" raised?
If I was going to do a halfling lich, I'd tweak the origin idea -- instead of the halfling seeking undeath, it would have somehow been forced upon him (or her). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 17:16:25
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I'm still a bit annoyed about people thinking I wanted to create alternate liches just for the 'kewlness' factor. And here I thought people knew me by now. What I don't want is for designer/authors to automatically give us the SAME lich every time. As GK said, if it can contribute to the story somehow, then do it. If you are doing it just to do it, then think things through (but don't simply dismiss it - an alternate take on an old monster could spark some new ideas for a story).
So, Aumvor, Ioulaum, Larloch, Shoon, and Tammy are all the same lich?  |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 13:07:44
Depending upon the type of gnomes you prefer,, you could either have a magical gem that creates a permanent illusion, and the gnome's soul is bound to that after death (creating a ghost-like lich, which is actually a sentient illusion), or the lich could be something akin to The Borg (Star Trek) if you like Tinker Gnomes.
I'm still a bit annoyed about people thinking I wanted to create alternate liches just for the 'kewlness' factor. And here I thought people knew me by now. What I don't want is for designer/authors to automatically give us the SAME lich every time. As GK said, if it can contribute to the story somehow, then do it. If you are doing it just to do it, then think things through (but don't simply dismiss it - an alternate take on an old monster could spark some new ideas for a story).
As for halfling liches, yes they should be incredibly rare - perhaps even unique. I can see one becoming a type of 'glutton lich'. The idea is to take the trope and create a variant that speaks to its race.
I am also against the never-ending MM's of past editions, and one of the problems I am having with PF ATM. A lot of things can be done with templates, but they (and past D&D) insist on complete monster write-ups for every variation, which I am not crazy about. To me, thats just coming up with 'filler' to sell more books (which is indeed the job of these companies, but I would rather see more setting lore being developed, then 'Monster Manual 17'). At the same time, I like books that detail races of creatures in detail, like their Classic Monsters revisited. Instead of 1-2 page descriptions of variants (of goblins, for example), I'd rather be presented with a detailed study of goblinkind, and then individual splats can give us those variations in the form of templates (or even simpler, ability substitutions).
More then anything, each lich should be unique. Players should not be able to read a monster entry and learn everything they need to know about them. Variations based on race is just another way to make them different, and give our players a few surprises. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 12:11:46
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Well, D&D has presented a vampire variant for every race; a few great ideas (I like dwarven vamps being able to meld into stone instead of going misty) but, as usual, carried to ridiculous D&D extremes of contrived symmetry. And elven baelnorn do suggest that other non-human lich types are possible. Indeed, I believe an ancient dwarven priest-lich can be found in the Undermountain: Stardock adventure.
I think the old 2E-era oppositional schools shouldn't be dismissed so easily, though. Becoming a lich may simply require access to necromantic magic without exception, and unfortunately that's not usually possible for illusionists. I also can't seriously imagine gnomish liches, although I do suppose they'd be able to fashion unsurpassed gemstone phylacteries. Halfling liches seem laughable and unlikely, especially since halfling clerics traditionally have a bit of a druidic view on things.
I agree on the halfling bit. It would be totally outside their societal view. The only way you'd have a halfling lich would be if he was a psycopath raised outside their society or something.... and generally that's not inclined toward the ordered paths necessary to achieve spellcasting greatness and more towards the nature of some kind of lunatic that...... hmmmm, where was Belkar Bitterleaf of "the order of the the stick" raised? |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 03:33:42
Well, D&D has presented a vampire variant for every race; a few great ideas (I like dwarven vamps being able to meld into stone instead of going misty) but, as usual, carried to ridiculous D&D extremes of contrived symmetry. And elven baelnorn do suggest that other non-human lich types are possible. Indeed, I believe an ancient dwarven priest-lich can be found in the Undermountain: Stardock adventure.
I think the old 2E-era oppositional schools shouldn't be dismissed so easily, though. Becoming a lich may simply require access to necromantic magic without exception, and unfortunately that's not usually possible for illusionists. I also can't seriously imagine gnomish liches, although I do suppose they'd be able to fashion unsurpassed gemstone phylacteries. Halfling liches seem laughable and unlikely, especially since halfling clerics traditionally have a bit of a druidic view on things. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Mar 2013 : 01:20:30
quote:
Originally posted by Eli the Tanner
Here's another example for the Lich brew....Grugaran aka "The Dodkong", a Stone Giant Lich who rules over Cairnheim.
And is one of my favourite Eric Boyd-era creations for the Realms.  |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 20:50:55
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Oh, and on "odd" liches, I also recall a dracolich that was one of the dragon men from Vaasa (forget their name) or maybe it was a half dragon. Not in a book mind you, but think it was an NPC posted on their web site.
I seem to recall a big debate about that one... Though it's been a long time, and I may be misremembering things.
The debate centered around whether or not a half-dragon could become a dracolich. Under the 3.x rules, it is technically possible. The 2E write-up and all lore about dracoliches, however, makes it clear that dracoliches are true, full-blooded dragons who embrace a form of lichdom.
It was another of those places in 3E where the lore and the rules contradicted each other. Another was the write-up for lythari, saying they were lycanthropes -- despite the fact that the only thing they had in common with lycanthropes was a beast shape. They didn't label song dragons, swanmays, or other changers as lycanthropes, but they did for lythari.
Yeah, I remember the discussion about the draco-lich that was a humanoid dragon being. I'd have to look at the two templates more closely to see where there would be a major difference.
I do understand the general peeve with the Lythari as lyncanthropes thing though. They're not cursed or inflicted with a disease. They don't spread it. That was just a serious bad call by whomever wrote it up. |
| Quale |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 19:02:07
sorry for the confusion, that cyclops lich was from PF
the derro lich half dragon is from Underdark, page 184-185
edit: also in one Polyhedron article about Vast there is a lich with antlers, could be an actaeon, shatjan, or verdant prince lich |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 17:25:27
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
Most exotic lich we've met was a cyclops. There's also a derro lich in Underdark.
Really? I'd be interested to see what they did with him after thinking about the possibilities above. What resource, do you know?
LOL - turns out the one I was thinking of is the other product I was converting to my current campaign - material from the Pathfinder Kingmaker adventure path. I was going back-and-forth between that and Neverwinter at the same time and got things mixed up.
I'd also like to know where FR's cyclops lich came from. Good call on the Dodking, BTW... I always seem to forget about him. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 16:54:54
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Oh, and on "odd" liches, I also recall a dracolich that was one of the dragon men from Vaasa (forget their name) or maybe it was a half dragon. Not in a book mind you, but think it was an NPC posted on their web site.
I seem to recall a big debate about that one... Though it's been a long time, and I may be misremembering things.
The debate centered around whether or not a half-dragon could become a dracolich. Under the 3.x rules, it is technically possible. The 2E write-up and all lore about dracoliches, however, makes it clear that dracoliches are true, full-blooded dragons who embrace a form of lichdom.
It was another of those places in 3E where the lore and the rules contradicted each other. Another was the write-up for lythari, saying they were lycanthropes -- despite the fact that the only thing they had in common with lycanthropes was a beast shape. They didn't label song dragons, swanmays, or other changers as lycanthropes, but they did for lythari. |
| Eli the Tanner |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 14:33:56
Here's another example for the Lich brew....Grugaran aka "The Dodkong", a Stone Giant Lich who rules over Cairnheim. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 14:22:15
Oh, and on "odd" liches, I also recall a dracolich that was one of the dragon men from Vaasa (forget their name) or maybe it was a half dragon. Not in a book mind you, but think it was an NPC posted on their web site. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 14:20:32
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
Most exotic lich we've met was a cyclops. There's also a derro lich in Underdark.
Really? I'd be interested to see what they did with him after thinking about the possibilities above. What resource, do you know? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 13:08:57
I think I just came across him the other day - he's from (4e) Neverwinter, right?
I decided to go with the 4e version of that region for my home campaign, so I was re-reading it. Except for the Aboleth-stuff, it's very good.
|
| Quale |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 10:43:32
Most exotic lich we've met was a cyclops. There's also a derro lich in Underdark. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 08:25:54
Lost Empires of Faerūn tells us that following Ioulaum's conversion to lichdom in the dying days of Netheril [the lifedrain spells of the phaerimm having disrupted his other life-extending magicks] he left the realm and went off to train a variety of apprentices, including illithids from the city of Ellyn'taal [presumed to be the first illithiliches]. Eventually he used his illithid students to create an undead elder brain and then merged himself with it.
Thus, if Ioulaum were to come back after being destroyed in his elder brain form, I would suspect he would have to inhabit [possess] either an artificially constructed undead vessel, or, perhaps, another elder brain. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 04:46:36
@Bladewind: To my knowledge, Ioulaum became a lich then became an elder brain, so therefore his phylactery would be whatever it was he chose when he became a lich. This begs the question, if by some miracle his body is destroyed, would he return as a elder brain form or with a normal human body? |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 01:52:46
As long as we're discussing races that might embrace lichdom, I know I mentioned the duergar as one you don't see much (and they work as both psionic and arcane liches). However, I started thinking derro... their savants are sorcerors, but they'd also have the charisma for say dread necromancer. If you wanted some really twisted minded lich.... that might be the way to go. I don't see their society necessarily having issues with it anymore than most other evil groups. In fact, the more I think on it, that could be very interesting if you had a derro society of savants that focused on all the charisma oriented arcane types.... warlocks, binders, dread necros, war mages, sorcerors, etc... |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 01:33:41
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
To answer you question about gnome liches, its a simple matter of game mechanics. Spells dealing with undead and undeath are Necromancy spells. Illusionists can't cast necromancy spells.
A possible way around this is by creating a gnome lich who lived in Myth Drannor and studied under an Elven Nelluonkkar Dualist (Illusionist/Necromancer specialist mage).
Otherwise, I'd argue an Illusinist gnome desirous of maintaining his existence would look for ways to do it that do not involve undeath. I guess it might be possible in some way for a gnome illusionist to become an Arch-Lich. The means of becoming an Arch-Lich have never been clearly defined as far as I know.
Also, the psionicist lich can be applied to most races as well.
An illusionist lich is possible, don't think in terms of 2nd edition opposition schools. However, your thoughts on a gnome seeking alternate means does fit in with what I was just saying. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 28 Feb 2013 : 01:30:41
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Hmm, I think I'm a bit old school and tropey. I like my liches to have a purpose. I think there is a reason that most liches portrayed in the sources are human, and that is because the Realms has always portrayed humans as a race as ambitious, in a hurry and power-grasping. In the (in relative terms) short lifespan of a human, especially one who stands at the cusp of real power through mastery of the Art, thoughts of immortality loom large. Lichdom is the most common and "easy to learn" path to this.
I think that gnome liches while feasible don't fit with the standard racial template (heck, stereotype if you will) and this is reinforced even further by Ed's latest Forging the Realms piece. The question that must always be asked whenever anyone is 'creative' in the Realms, is "why is this the way it is?". Why would a gnome illusionist want to embrace lichdom? Why would any gnome want to embrace lichdom? With the elves, Ed provided a wonderful, in game and in setting reason for the baelnorn. If a Realms product or novel came up with a really good, lore-invested, FR-grounded reason for a gnome lich, I'd jump all over it. If it was just done for variety and so as not to be "boring and tropey", I call "Meh". YMMV of course.
-- George Krashos
That's a damn good point. Humans are definitely more short-lived than the other races, and combinining that with their natural adaptability.... it only makes sense that they'd have more liches than any other. Other races with longer lives may be less inclined to trying to extend their lives near the end, especially if for instance they've seen generation after generation of human friends come and go. Also, undeath may be considered such a taboo amongst their society that they'd never consider it (which in my book would preclude say dwarf liches, but not necessarily duergar ones).
On the gnome example however.... I wouldn't be surprised to maybe find a gnome who wanted to instill himself into a golem or other type of construct rather than a lich. Putting their soul into another "shell" isn't the same as embracing undeath, and I'd see that being the more "preferred" path of a gnome who wanted to seek a longer life. |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 23:27:40
The mention of psionic liches has peaked my interest. After looking into their appearance and behavior they do seem to come off as alot less malevolent, and their undead state is only slightly different from an arcane lich, but enough to be disturbingly so. (I love the psionic sparks for blood thing.)
If I use them in my games I'd tweak them a little. Psionic liches posses some necrotic way of empowering their own corpse with their personality and mentality, to shamble on, forever in persuit of higher mental powers. I am unsure if I would incorporate a gem phylactery, because I think something bigger and more ctulhu-esque is needed as a tether for psionic power. A psionicly preserved hart, contained in a life sustaining pod made of ectoplasm and obsidian, perhaps holds the psionic center of the psi-lich. Iouloum is a good example of how a psionic lich should be, totally alien looking and nearly incomprehenisble in intellect. Is Iouloums' phylactery his pool? |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 20:53:41
There was a half lich/ half ghost monster once upon a time in Dragon Mag. Though they never said either word in the description. It was another kind of undead. There are about 100000000 different undead monsters in AD&D 1st & Second edition if you include Dragon, Dungeon & Polyhedron.
I'd agree with Arik though. If this is the kind of thing you are wanting from your "lich," then its time to stop thinking of it as a lich. Its kinda like wanting a Pegasus with no wings. There's no reason for it not to be a new "monster" but there's also no reason for it to be a pegasus. BOOM - Asperii is born. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 18:12:56
I don't think an illusionary ghost-lich could work. D&D ghosts are incorporeal, an imprint of the soul (or whatever) being anchored to the living world through some place, person, object, or condition. Most D&D ghosts are not even truly conscious, even the higher-ordered ghost types like banshees. Whereas D&D liches are definitely tangible, sustaining their souls (and bodies) through powerful arcane containments, they are typically hyper-intelligent and many are at least a little insane.
One could argue that a "phylactery" mechanism applies to both, but I suppose that's a matter of definition. I think ghosts are unable to die while liches are unwilling to die, an important difference.
Apparitions and liches are also dissimilar tropes. Combining them is about as meaningful as combining ninjas and pirates. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 17:57:49
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Given that illusionists have a penchant for phantasms, why not some sort of ghost-lich? The point was I didn't want just a smaller version of a regular lich (although that is rather creepy, IMO) - I want to see differences between them... COOL differences. As I said earlier, the same way in which RL had different stats for different race vampires.
I think the sentience of a gnome illusionist residing inside a permanent illusion would be kinda cool... maybe its just me.
That's a cool idea, so long as you can explain it. But it's not the same thing as a lich.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
AFAIK, no company has ever been able to stay-afloat re-releasing 'outdated' products. What I've come to realize is that the market has moved forward, and most of FR's current fanbase have not. There are simply not enough of us 'old timers' left to keep things afloat, and I have yet to see anything that will appeal to the younger generation (who all seemed to be quite familiar with Golarion).
So YES, I like 'tropey stuff' too... but thats not what FR needs right now. Once again, I applaud the 4e team for at least trying to do something.
Without going into the edition wars... Forward progress does not require catastrophic change. The setting has never been static, but until the Spellplague, even the biggest "current" RSEs weren't really game-changers for the setting. There is a lot that can be done to revitalize the setting, and the basics -- like rich, detailed history and nothing existing in isolation -- do not need to be casualties of forward movement. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 13:19:11
I said I applaud them for trying... NOT succeeding. 
I've read a few, and aside from Rich Baker's series (which barely even touched upon the Spellplague, which is probably why I liked it), none of it has 'grabbed me'.
I have no interest in the changes they made... which actually makes me part of the problem.  |
| Dennis |
Posted - 27 Feb 2013 : 13:12:56
"Tropey stuff" like human liches? FR does not need it right now? Hah! Try to grab some 4E novels for a change and see how mistaken you are. |
|
|
