D&D 5E Why Lichdom?

[Warmaster Horus]

...
Oh, you mean you disagree. You have a different opinion. Sure, that's valid. ...

Sorry 'bout that. Yes, it is a different opinion. There have been a lot of folks who have not read the spell responding so I went off half-cocked. In any event I'm glad you responded with an interesting existential point of view. Given that our bodies cycle through atoms in their composition all the time there's nothing 'proprietary' about the atoms of your body that's integral to your existence (in my opinion).

However in a universe with established souls that are the core of your self I would say that an amalgam of that component mixed with a genetic copy of your physicality would be a pretty darn hard act to improve on. Certainly beats Reincarnation!

 

[Coroc]

To clarify some things pls correct me if i am wrong: afaik

Liches do not Need to sacrifice souls to their phylactery, it contains their own Soul [MENTION=6785438]Warmaster Horus[/MENTION]

If seperated from the Soul the lifeforce of a lich which is downed, can seek out the nearest corpse and animate in there (which may Need some time).

Phylacteries can take about any form and they can be Close to indestructable.

When the phylactery is destroyed the soul Returns to the Liches current corpse, it is therefore connected to the lifeforce again and if the lich is slain it goes to the afterlife meaning final death for the lich. Whatever afterlife may be in this case.

You still Need to fight the Lich though, it is not automatically slain when you destroy ist phylactery.

I think creating a phylactery is not that difficult it is a Variation of the trap the Soul spell (at least it was in former Editions)

The clone Thing in 5E straight from the book had some Limitation, i think you can only have one clone at any given time, so if your enemies are on your heels the cloning strategy (creating the next one) is dangerous

 

[Warmaster Horus]

To clarify some things pls correct me if i am wrong: afaik

Liches do not Need to sacrifice souls to their phylactery, it contains their own Soul...

I believe this is mentioned in the MM entry for Lich...

A lich must periodically feed souls to its phylactery to sustain the magic preserving its body and consciousness. It does this using the "Imprisonment" spell. Instead of choosing one of the normal options of the spell, the lich uses the spell to magically trap the target's body and soul inside its phylactery. The phylactery must be on the same plane as the lich for the spell to work. A creature imprisoned in the phylactery for 24 hours is consumed and destroyed utterly, whereupon nothing short of divine intervention can restore it to life. A lich that fails or forgets to maintain its body with sacrificed souls begins to physically fall apart, and might eventually become a demilich.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Perhaps a good vs evil divide here as well? We've seen some good-aligned liches at times in D&D but the archetype is definitively evil. The use of sacrificed souls to sustain themselves is a fundamentally evil act in most circumstances. There's nothing particular evil about creating some spare, soul-less bodies here and there.

Except I believe the soul feeding requirement is a 5E addition unless it came out somewhere during 3E. So most DnD related lich foes, you cannot take a walk without running into one in the FR were created before this obviously evil requirement was added.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

To clarify some things pls correct me if i am wrong: afaik

OK I will.

Liches do not Need to sacrifice souls to their phylactery, it contains their own Soul [MENTION=6785438]Warmaster Horus[/MENTION]

No they do need to sacrifice a soul to their phylactery once in a while to avoid decaying. Also their soul is not in the Phylactery by Default.

If separated from the Soul the lifeforce of a lich which is downed, can seek out the nearest corpse and animate in there (which may Need some time).

Incorrect. The Lich's soul is in their body by default and goes to their phylactery if their body is destroyed. Over 1 to 10 days a new body is regenerated near their phylactery. No need for a nearby corpse.

Phylacteries can take about any form and they can be Close to indestructable.

This is true.

When the phylactery is destroyed the soul Returns to the Liches current corpse, it is therefore connected to the lifeforce again and if the lich is slain it goes to the afterlife meaning final death for the lich. Whatever afterlife may be in this case.

No the soul does not return to the Lich because as mentioned the soul is in the Lich until their body is destoryed. But this is just a slight misunderstanding. Also it's ambiguous if the Lich does go to the afterlife. Lots of products make it that the Lich faces oblivion upon both their body and phylactery being destroyed.

You still Need to fight the Lich though, it is not automatically slain when you destroy ist phylactery.

Correct.

I think creating a phylactery is not that difficult it is a Variation of the trap the Soul spell (at least it was in former Editions)

It has nothing to do with Trap the Soul. (Though Imprisoning souls inside the Phylactery is how a lich sacrifices souls to them.) And it is fairly difficult in that it takes a long time and is expensive.

The clone Thing in 5E straight from the book had some Limitation, i think you can only have one clone at any given time, so if your enemies are on your heels the cloning strategy (creating the next one) is dangerous

Correct one Clone at a time.

 

[neogod22]

I like the old version where the lich would inhabit a body near its phylactory, rather that it just creates a new one. It creates the possibility that the lich can actually be trapped in it.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[Dausuul]

Except I believe the soul feeding requirement is a 5E addition unless it came out somewhere during 3E. So most DnD related lich foes, you cannot take a walk without running into one in the FR were created before this obviously evil requirement was added.

1E was silent on the subject of lich alignment, aside from putting "Neutral (Evil)" in the statblock.

2E made a point of calling out that good-aligned liches, while rare, did exist.

3E stated that the process of becoming a lich was "unspeakably evil."

4E said the transformation ritual was "dark and terrible" and that all liches paid homage to Orcus, but stopped short of saying they were all evil.

5E introduced the soul feeding requirement.

 

[neogod22]

1E was silent on the subject of lich alignment, aside from putting "Neutral (Evil)" in the statblock.

2E made a point of calling out that good-aligned liches, while rare, did exist.

3E stated that the process of becoming a lich was "unspeakably evil."

4E said the transformation ritual was "dark and terrible" and that all liches paid homage to Orcus, but stopped short of saying they were all evil.

5E introduced the soul feeding requirement.

Also, 4E had the Archlich as an epic destiny, saying you found a way to become a lich without going through Orcus

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[Nytmare]

This can easily dealt with without having the lich get his hands dirty. He just creates soul stealing magic items and put them out into the world. Warriors don't have to know their sword of sharpness is actually feeding a lich they don't know about.

Three Swords for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men, doomed to die.

 

[Yes]

Maybe the mage suffered a loss that makes him/her want to be free of emotions.

Maybe the ritual to attain lichdom is in fact a failure. Maybe the first mortal to try and accomplish the ritual had another idea in mind (godhood or something else) but his/her failure is still passed on as a mean to attain pseudo-immortality.

Might be sacrilege, rebellion against a god that drives a mage to perform the unspeakable evil of a lichdom ritual, just for the "hell" of it.

Cloning might simply not be that safe. Their might be a chance one of the clones gets a life on his own and hunts for his creator. But those evil clones cover their tracks so efficiently only a few magic experts are aware of it. Maybe the mage seeked lichdom after surviving such a cloning accident and wrote off the option.

Maybe it's about obsession with the collecting of souls.

Maybe being a lich feels awesome. Maybe it's like being a rockstar on it's prime or something. Maybe you constantly have a wicked heavy metal guitar solo playing in your mind at all time with visions of flames and explosions and shooting stars etc etc... ^^

I think we should try to look for stories in the question "Why would anybody want to become a lich?" rather than "What's more powerful?"