D&D 5E "The" Lich?

[Mouseferatu]

I have a serious problem with Vecna being a god. I just found him far more interesting when he was a mythic lich who may or may not have survived his "destruction" and the loss of his hand and eye. I think it's boring storytelling to have made so many of the iconic villains into gods. Vecna's more interesting as a mythic lich. Lolth is more interesting as a demon. Tiamat is more interesting as the progenitor, but not necessarily goddess, of chromatic dragons.

The fact is, D&D has lots of liches, but none are truly iconic. Vecna, even before his ill-planned divinity, may or may not have still existed. He was a source of legend and the artifacts named after him. Acererak is close, but he's a demi-lich. Azalin is boring, and dwells in the shadow of far more interesting Ravenloft darklords. Szass Tam is... Eh. The fact that he's a lich is frankly secondary to the fact that he's the zulkir (sp?) of necromancy in Thay.

At no point, IMO, has D&D successfully built an ongoing and sufficiently broad story around a given lich character to qualify them for the iconic status of a Strahd or a Lord Soth.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Lolth is more interesting as a demon. Tiamat is more interesting as the progenitor, but not necessarily goddess, of chromatic dragons.

Lolth's fundamental narrative purpose is to be worshiped by the drow and have temples and priestesses and all that divine paraphernalia. Saying that she's a demon, not a goddess, strikes me as a distinction without a difference. Tiamat may or may not be worshiped by chromatics, but either way she's so stupidly powerful that, again, objecting to the label of "goddess" seems kind of pointless.

At no point, IMO, has D&D successfully built an ongoing and sufficiently broad story around a given lich character to qualify them for the iconic status of a Strahd or a Lord Soth.

Does the "Vecna Lives!" story not qualify because of the god thing? Because to me, that's clearly the D&D lich story. I don't think merely disliking it would be really relevant to its status here, in the context of this discussion.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Lolth's fundamental narrative purpose is to be worshiped by the drow and have temples and priestesses and all that divine paraphernalia. Saying that she's a demon, not a goddess, strikes me as a distinction without a difference. Tiamat may or may not be worshiped by chromatics, but either way she's so stupidly powerful that, again, objecting to the label of "goddess" seems kind of pointless.

I disagree. It's more than just a label. It has a specific meaning, and includes specific places in the world/cosmology.

Does the "Vecna Lives!" story not qualify because of the god thing? Because to me, that's clearly the D&D lich story. I don't think merely disliking it would be really relevant to its status here, in the context of this discussion.

It doesn't feel like a "lich story" at all to me. The fact that Vecna was originally a lich frankly feels tangential to the entire affair. It's just another "stop the big evil from becoming even bigger" plot. And its very multi-planar "playing on the level of gods" nature works against it being an iconic lich story.

Note that I'm including the whole series of modules in my answer... I don't feel like it qualifies, in part because of the "god thing" (in that we never actually see Vecna just behaving as a lich, but it's always about divinity), in part because Vecna should never have had anything to do with Ravenloft--he's a bad fit--in part because because various portions of the story violate existing mood and cannon of multiple settings (Ravenloft, Sigil), and in part because it's just frankly not that good.

Also, part of someone becoming an iconic villain includes stories that get into their backgrounds, their histories, their heads. Strahd and Soth both have that.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Does the "Vecna Lives!" story not qualify because of the god thing? Because to me, that's clearly the D&D lich story.

Exactly. The iconic lich story is that you've triumphed over your own mortality, so divinity is the next logical step. It's about dreaming big, and never giving up in the face of adversity or certain blasphemy.

It's inspiring.

 

[Al2O3]

The iconic lich to me is Lorlach, but I could not name him until I saw the name in the thread. Sazz Tam is, as someone mentioned previously, first the ruler of Thay, second a lich. Lorlach if the only one I know of as a lich first, other potential things second (such as chosen, ruler of other liches etc). If I heard of a D&D lich story I would expect it to be about Lorlach the way I expect a vampire story to be about Stradh and a death knight story to be about Lord Soth.

Aside about Lord Soth: I know he is a death knight, and death knights are scary when they have a company of undead. I know nothing else about either (origin, setting, story role etc). Thus he is the most iconic representative of its type I've seen in this thread.

 

[steeldragons]

Keraptis is not a lich ether just an ancient human found a way to live a long time.

Is he though? Do we know? Have we ever seen him? That's what the characters may think...what the lore is...

But the dude has three artifact-level items in his possession, immortal/magical guardians (including but not limited to a sphinx, an oni, and multiple efreet) that have been subjugated for his own purposes, and an entire magical labyrinth he -allegedly- constructed inside an active volcanic/gyser mountain.

I don't know about you, but if the world believes he's just some ancient seemingly incredibly powerful wizard who's achieved immortality...that certainly says "Keraptis is [or most certainly can be] a lich" to me.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I have a serious problem with Vecna being a god. I just found him far more interesting when he was a mythic lich who may or may not have survived his "destruction" and the loss of his hand and eye. I think it's boring storytelling to have made so many of the iconic villains into gods. Vecna's more interesting as a mythic lich. Lolth is more interesting as a demon. Tiamat is more interesting as the progenitor, but not necessarily goddess, of chromatic dragons.

One of the biggest problems with making Vecna a god is that it just emphasizes that... nothing bad happens when Vecna becomes a god. The world keeps on turning, and heroes keep looting dungeons. Why did we even care about stopping Vecna's ascension if gods don't even do anything?!?!!

 

[Al2O3]

Question about Vecna as god: I started playing D&D during 4e and I think it wasn't until SCAG I ever saw anything about Vecna once being a lich. So when did the ascension happen in publishing? Was it sometime during 3.X? If I recall correctly Vecna was one of the gods mentioned in 4e PHB, but I haven't checked recently.

 

[Henry]

Asberdies

Module D1, area 7, SUNKEN CAVE.

PCs just randomly stumbling in there were the ones who were usually sunk. This guy is bad news.

Asberdies always struck me as a silly encounter - superpowerful lich just sitting in a one-chamber cavern, with his treasure pile, waiting to... Um, fornicate up a party of adventurers. He was like a magic-wielding undead bear hibernating in his den...

 

[Ristamar]

Question about Vecna as god: I started playing D&D during 4e and I think it wasn't until SCAG I ever saw anything about Vecna once being a lich. So when did the ascension happen in publishing? Was it sometime during 3.X? If I recall correctly Vecna was one of the gods mentioned in 4e PHB, but I haven't checked recently.

The ascension occurred during the transition from 2e to 3e.

Technically, he was stopped from reaching his ultimate goal. I won't post spoilers here; the plot/summary is easy to locate if you're interested.