Liches Touching Themselves

[Scharlata]

Angemessenes Behaartes, Lich

Sorry, to hijack that thread, but how can somthing be called: "Reasonably Hirsute"?

 

[airwalkrr]

The opportunity cost on the lich healing itself 1d8+5 is HIGH. It takes a round, and provokes an AoO. No Lich would ever use it in combat, which makes this an OOC ability. Really, who cares if liches can heal themselves to full out of combat. Is this somehow unbalancing?

In the hands of an NPC, no, this is not really unbalancing. If the lich had a wand of inflict light wounds he could effectively do the same thing with negligible impact on his resources. However, in the hands of a PC lich character, this lets the PC heal himself "for free" all the time. Or consider the 1st level dread necromancer with the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat from Libris Mortis. If everyone in the party takes that feat they have free OOC healing. Not a bad ability at 1st level. Hell, it isn't bad for 10th level.

 

[Crothian]

How's it any different? If you have different rules for each, then why doesn't a "magic ring for NPC's only" not fit well within your system?

Because a magic item and a template are different. A magical item that people can get at 3rd level is also way different from a character option gained at 15th level. The magical item can be used to heal the whole party, the Lich can not. And by the rules I can have a magical item that only works for some NPCs.

Regardless, the blatant inconsistency you've created is another Bad Idea™ and really has nothing at all to do with any of my previous posts.

It is not inconsistant. NPCs and PCs are consistantly not equal in the game. And I think you need to say it is a bad idea for you, because it obviously causes me no problems.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Sorry, to hijack that thread, but how can somthing be called: "Reasonably Hirsute"?

Heh.

Hooray for Babelfish! I typed in "Fair Haired" and ran it through a bunch of English to [Foreign Language] filters until I got something sounding reasonably lichy. I could've saved myself some time and gone right to German first, though.

 

[Scharlata]

Heh.

Hooray for Babelfish! I typed in "Fair Haired" and ran it through a bunch of English to [Foreign Language] filters until I got something sounding reasonably lichy. I could've saved myself some time and gone right to German first, though.

but to be true, it SOUNDS really LICHY

Fair haired as in "blond" [engl.] = blond [ger.]

 

[werk]

I wouldn't allow it to heal itself -- a river can't make itself wetter -- but I would allow it to heal other undead. And a smart lich might keep around a wight or something to heal it as needed.

Likewise. The question was can a lich heal undead with it's touch, so I voted yes. He wouldn't be able to heal himself though.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Fair haired as in "blond" [engl.] = blond [ger.]

But, then the joke would be way too obvious.

 

[Seeten]

My Dread Necromancer did have Tomb-Tainted Soul, oddly enough. And it didnt break the game nearly as much as the Cleric with divine metamagic.

...

 

[Falling Icicle]

From the SRD entry on the undead creature type:

"Cannot heal damage on its own if it has no Intelligence score, although it can be healed. Negative energy (such as an inflict spell) can heal undead creatures."

http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monsterTypes.html

This would include all spells and effects that inflict negative energy damage, regardless of whether or not their descriptions remind us of this general rule. So yes, a Lich can touch itself or other undead to heal.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Negative energy (such as an inflict spell) can heal undead creatures.

It can, but that doesn't mean that it always does. If it did they would have said "Negative energy (such as an inflict spell) heals undead creatures."

Similarly positive energy (such as a cure spell) can heal living creatures, but it need not always do so.

For example, see Bolt of Glory.