D&D 5E Lich's To Weak for Their CR?

[pemerton]

I think the Lich is more like CR 16 in terms of actual threat. If you make destroying the phylactery very hard (contrary to Gygax's intent - it bugs me that the 2e people didn't know a phylactery has to go on your head or wrist... but whatever) then the high CR is justified for final destruction.

The 1st ed AD&D doesn't say anything about the lich reforming if killed, either. I had never come across this idea until I saw it in action with a 2nd ed AD&D GM.

 

[pemerton]

Howard was influential in the Sword-and-Sorcery genre that gave rise to D&D, but NONE of those are liches. Thugra Khotan is a mage who puts himself to sleep for a couple thousand years because invaders were about to sack his city. Xaltotun is a deceased high priest who is resurrected exactly ONCE by arcane dabblers using a powerful artifact in the hope that he can teach them secrets about the dark arts. Howard describes them as having unnatural traits, but Howard describes ALL wizard-types as unnatural regardless of whether living or not. A better example of a lich in classic fantasy literature IMO is no less than Tolkien's Sauron - who reforms repeatedly after death, whose life force is tied to a specific item (the one ring), and who, yes, is the equivalent of a sorcerer by middle-earth standards. Sauron operates completely off screen (at least in LOTR), which helps to dehumanize him, play up the theme of an alien mind, and maintain the impact of the threat he poses by keeping it unknown and/or ill defined.

I think Sauron as a lich is an interesting approach, though not personally one I would adopt.

But I think you are being a bit literal about the REH magicians. Just as Sauron does not exactly resemble a D&D lich (eg he was never mortal, and his body is not that of a skeleton/corpse), so the fact that they differ somewhat from the D&D lich doesn't (in my view) rule them out as exemplars. Gygax says that a lich "passes from a state of humanity to a non-human, nonliving existence through force of will. It retains this status by certain conjurations, enchantments, and a phylactery." The REH magicians evoke this to me at least.

Gygax also says other things about a lich that make me think of it being ready to act forthrightly, rather than working from the shadows:

Through the power which changes this creature from human to lich, the armor class becomes the equivalent of +1 plate armor and + 1 shield (armor class 0). Similarly, hit dice are 8-sided, and the lich can be affected only by magical attack forms . . . The mere sight of a lich will cause any creature below 5th level (or 5 hit dice) to flee in panic from fear.​

So they have nothing to fear from armies, who will flee before them! Only Conan-esque warriors or rival magicians might defeat them!

(That's not to say that everything Gygax did with liches was gold. He also gave us the lich hanging out on a hidden ledge with the troglodytes in D1. One of his odder choices for monster placement.)

 

[S'mon]

The 1st ed AD&D doesn't say anything about the lich reforming if killed, either. I had never come across this idea until I saw it in action with a 2nd ed AD&D GM.

Me too - I still don't like it. But I guess it's a big part of lich CR.

 

[transtemporal]

While it doesn't address the issue of the Lich's combat ability or lack thereof, I've always thought liches were at their most thematically effective when they operate off-stage.

This is the problem though. A lich is a tough undead that the PCs expect to have an epic battle with. Sure you can tart the encounter up with minions and puzzles and whatever else, but eventually the lich has to go toe to toe with the PCs and if the party walks all over the undead equivalent of the accountant, it's anticlimatic. At this point, you may as well have swapped out the mysterious-lich-behind-the-scenes for an actual accountant.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Things like the phylactery don't go into determining CR. CR is entirely a factor of combat stats, averaged over three rounds--damage output, chance to hit, hit points, AC, saves, that stuff. The lich may or may not be accurately CRed; I mean, a lot of monsters in the MM aren't. But it's not because of the phylactery, one way or the other.

 

[dave2008]

The lich may or may not be accurately CRed; I mean, a lot of monsters in the MM aren't. But it's not because of the phylactery, one way or the other.

Actually the MM CRs are very accurate (per the DMG) for what it is. Most people forget to modify the CR based on:

1) Resistance and Immunities
2) Monster features (there is a 2 page table in the DMG for this) - things like aggressive, magic resistance, legendary resistance, etc. all modify the CR.

Now, whether the CR is representative of the actually difficulty you see in the encounter building guidelines is total different.

 

[dkmurphy]

As others have stated, if a Lich is easy to kill, it is because the DM is not running them very creatively. Most of DM's and players do not have a 20 or greater intelligence in real life, and running a campaign means juggling a ton of information, and it is difficult to come up with plans on the spot that are super genius level. It is sometimes hard to remember what they can DO, what they are immune to etc. Each player has the advantage of thinking about only ONE character and having time in between other players actions to think of things to do. I tend to be pretty creative and playing my illusionist I sometimes forget some of the things he can do or have a hard time coming up with something on the spot, can't plan for EVERYTHING, and that is running one character. When I DM, I have less time to spend on each NPC/Monster abilities and ideas. I make cheat sheets etc, but in the midst of a combat I can easily forget to do some things I had planned to do.

That said, the monster is a high level spell caster. If they attack alone or out in the open by themselves or caught in a really lame lair, they will be way weaker than a similar CR monster. This has to be played WELL and planned out. I've seen more than a couple threads where DM's asked for advice on a Lich encounter. If a party of players cake walks through a Lich encounter, that is squarely the DM's fault. If it is in a published adventure and weak, that is poor writing.

Arguing whether or not a phylactery has to be worn is pointless. The DM can change anything in their game to make it work the way they want. So if the DM wants the phylactery to be a sword hidden in a mountain or something that is their call.

If players are cake walking this monster the DM should up his game. Read threads on high level spell casters, ask advice etc. Unless the players have the means and ability and actually learn the Lich's defenses and MO, they should be very hard pressed to live let alone win. And if the Lich is not just some random encounter, then they should have a very good idea of what the characters can do and plan accordingly.