A Lich and his Phylactery

J

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

• Jul 22, 2002

• #1

Situation.

Lich wants to live forever. He knows his only weakness is hy phylactery. So lich puts the phylactery into a back of holding and then sticks the bag of holding into a portable hole.

The resulting explosion throws the phylactery somewhere that is "lost forever" as per the description in the DMG.


So is the Lich now immortal and completely unkillable as an old DM of mine from earlier this year told me?

Or would it be as a said. A phylactery lost "forever" is effectively destroyed since "forever" means no one ever no matter how much time passes will be ever able to find it. The only way something can be that lost is if it is actually destroyed.


I also argued that even if the Lich does regenerate he would regenerate near his phylactery and thus be lost forever along with it.

Opinions?

 

log in or register to remove this ad

V

Valicor

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #2

DocMoriartty said:

Situation.
I also argued that even if the Lich does regenerate he would regenerate near his phylactery and thus be lost forever along with it.

Opinions?

Click to expand...

I think that, that could be a very painful way, for a lich to planeshift.
Ouch!

 

L

Lord Ben

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #3

I would have the Lich reform near his phylactery and then teleport where he needs to go. Magical divination could detect it on the plane of lost things or whatever. That'd be the way I'd judge on it at least.

 

A

Arravis

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #4

Well... the "Lost forever" thing is a bit... exagerated. It's in the astral somewhere... it can be found, just tough to do.

 

J

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

• Jul 22, 2002

• #5

That has been the term used (If I am remembering it correctly) since 1E.

Straight by the rules, it means lost forever. I have never seen any rules explanation otherwise.

Arravis said:

Well... the "Lost forever" thing is a bit... exagerated. It's in the astral somewhere... it can be found, just tough to do.

Click to expand...

 

C

Cheiromancer

Adventurer

• Jul 22, 2002

• #6

If the lich reforms near the phylactery, then he's found it, hasn't he? If he can get back, then the phylactery was not, in fact, lost forever. But it is lost forever. Therefore, if the lich reforms near the phylactery, he too is lost forever, and can't get back.

For all practical purposes the phylactery has been destroyed.

 

A

Arravis

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #7

I vaguely remember a Dragon magazine article many years ago on this... anyone remember?

Anyway, as a DM, I'd say that if it's not destroyed, it's not lost forever. Someone, someday will find it.

 

J

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

• Jul 22, 2002

• #8

That would be a house rule and a changing of the clear cut statement of the DMG. That is fine but I am looking for opinions on the rules specifically as they are written.

Arravis said:

Anyway, as a DM, I'd say that if it's not destroyed, it's not lost forever. Someone, someday will find it.

Click to expand...

 

F

Forrester

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #9

I don't see the point of asking for suggestions if you're going to stick to the empty-headed rules lawyer interpretation, regardless of how silly it is when taken to extremes.

Let me guess . . . in your campaign, you can use a Tanglefoot bag to slow a Tarrasque to half-movement for ten minutes, huh?

"Lost Forever" is clearly flavor text. It means "Way way way way way way way way way way way WAY far away from you -- potentially so far away that even with a Wish, you wouldn't be able to get it back."

Though I would think that "Lost Forever" does not necessarily mean "Lost Forever, Wish spells notwithstanding".

But since you insist reading volumes into those two little words . . . I would ALSO read "Lost Forever" to "Lost Forever . . . to YOU."

Meaning some Bart Simpson-like creature eighteen dimensions away may find it somewhere and go "Smashee Smashee!"

In general . . . I think it's a baaad way to try to make yourself immortal.

 

Artoomis

First Post

• Jul 22, 2002

• #10

First off, here's the actual rule:

If a bag of holding is placed within a portable hole, a rift to the Astral Plane is torn in the space: Bag and hole alike are sucked into the void and forever lost.

Click to expand...

It actually does not say what happens to the contents, but one would assume they, too, are "sucked into the void."

The question is not so much what "forever lost" means as what is means to be "sucked into the void." I assume the void is a non-place that things go to when they are gone forever. Basically - destroyed.

On the flip side, though:

If a portable hole is placed within a bag of holding, it opens a gate to the Astral Plane: The hole, the bag, and any creatures within a 10-foot radius are drawn there, destroying the portable hole and bag of holding in the process.

Click to expand...

It is interesting that one way the hole and bag are "lost forever," while the other way they are "destroyed." Also, the second method might not destroy any contents, simply leaving them strewn on the Astral Plane somehwere.

Kind of makes you think, doesn;'t it?

I think that the "void" is some non-place from which nothing ever returns. If that's the case, it may be that the Lich is re-formed after "death" in the Void, where he survives an eternity seeing nothing, sensing nothing, with no hope of escape.

Not fun, eh?