It's very far from obscure. But the editions themselves shift.
In the first edition version, the only offensive abilities Acererak had manifested if the players attacked the phantasm or (Idiotically) touched the skull. The text makes clear that these are the only conditions under which Acererak can harm the players, and does not say anything about what happens if the players leave. Because the text does not explicitly say that just walking away is an option, DMs who don't read the text carefully could easily miss either of the two important points. And thus, it's clear that players can even leave with the treasure without immediate consequences provided they keep their cool and don't go on the attack and for gods' sake don't touch the skull. The text makes clear that destroying the skull is very difficult (and if I recall, none of the pre-gen characters have the weapons to do so, and A. does not leave them lying around the lair) but stresses the possibility of defeating it with very creative play. (which is why the option of just leaving is clearly in the spirit of the thing) At this point, the demi-lich was *only* published in this module and thus its weaknesses would be unknown to general gamers.
(This is, I would say, part of what makes me a fan of ToH - the entire dungeon is based around teaching players to think and act cautiously, like a bomb squad, and if they do exactly that in the final encounter, they will live. If they lose their nerve and attack, it's all over).
But at some point, it became more general knowledge, and the run away strategy became known. Certainly after the publication of the original Monster Manual 2, people could read about Demi-Liches even without playing the module.
From Return to the Tomb of Horrors (2e) onwards, there is a shift. I don't have RttToH in front of me, but (spoilers) while the original tomb is not reworked, it does eventually become necessary to face the skull construct in a situation where retreat is not an option and some kind of fight is required. In the 3rd edition and 4th edition versions, the "loophole" has been closed and the skull does not need to wait to attack. But in all of those scenarios, player levels are higher and they can be assumed to have some pre-knowledge, or at least know enough to cast a divination spell.
Yawning Portal - let's see...yes, because they've gone back to Gygax's original text for inspiration, it seems to preserve the option of the non-combat resolution - the skull construct activates as a demilich only if touched. It has access to Trap the Soul and Lair actions, but not lair traits.
(I don't have the 5e MM. What are the Lair actions for a demi-lich?)
Oh, it's far more than lair abilities.
They have a howl (recharge 5-6) that drops all creature within 30 feet to 0 hp if they fail a DC 15 Constitution save, otherwise they are frightened.
Life Drain - target up to 3 creatures within 10 feet for 6d6 necrotic damage, DC 19 Constitution save for half and the demilich regains an equal amount of hit points.
Legendary actions include flying, a cloud of dust that blinds on failed DC 15 Constitution save, Energy Drain that reduces max hit points by 3d6 for all creatures within 30 feet if they fail a DC 15 Constitution save, and Vile Curse that imposes disadvantage on attacks and saving throws unless the creature makes a DC 15 Wisdom save (each round).
Lair actions are an earthquake (DC 19 Dexterity save or be knocked prone); An
antimagic field against a target within 60 feet, no save and it moves with the target until the next round; or all creatures within 30 feet cannot regain hit points until the next round.
I just feel that there should have been a sidebar to explain the original design, and that the only attacks that Acererak could make are the ones listed in the text, or that you could run it like a regular encounter with all of the abilities noted in the MM.
Yes, those options exist. In my (limited) experience, DMs miss the no combat option. My theory is simply because it doesn't occur to them that it
is an option. This is the BBEG. Look at all the amazing powers. It's going to be a heck of a fight! The original encounter goes directly against the complaint of this thread - that BBEGs are too weak. This one isn't only originally weak, but doesn't even attack unless you provoke it.
Incidentally, in the original, a thief slinging the gems found in the tomb could kill him. Otherwise, it was only spells that worked. This was removed in the 3e version (and he was a construct, not undead, in 4e he's a construct homunculus and undead)
Thank you.
Okay so the issue has been resolved. No need to assume the presence of a stat block means automatic combat.
My complaint is based on the fact that the few DMs I know personally that have played it did what they did for every other monster encounter. They prepped for the encounter by going to the MM entry and being prepared for the encounter, with the BBEG ready to defend its treasure. It didn't even occur to them that in addition to not having access to its lair traits, that it also didn't have the usual actions and legendary actions either.
Ironically, the one that I know who didn't make Acererak attack immediately complained it was stupid that he didn't attack until he was touched, because his players didn't touch the skull and almost got away with the treasure. He thought it was a mistake, and attacked once they started taking treasure.
Don't make assumptions. Check the text. Does the Yawning version tell the DM there might be a way to avoid combat, or not?
As I said, the text is copy/pasted from the original. The relevant text is:
"If any of the treasure is touched, the dust swirls into the air and forms a man-like shape. If this shape is ignored it will dissipate in 3 rounds, for it can only advance and threaten, not harm ...
That's the same as the original. I thought I remembered it acting like it was casting a spell, but that was only in the false tomb after going back to the original.
If any character is so foolish as to touch the skull of the demilich, a terrible thing occurs ...
This is only in reference to the trap the soul ability, since that's the only attack he had at the time.
In TftYP it also mentions
"The demilich has the Trap the Soul action, and access to its lair actions, but not lair traits." It does not mention that it doesn't have access to its normal actions or legendary actions.
So the option is definitely there, I just don't think it's clear. It doesn't say there is a possibility to avoid it (with the skull), only when it uses the trap the soul action. The fact that the DMs I know that have played it didn't catch it would seem to support that.
Going back to the 3e version (Not
Return to the Tomb of Horrors, but the updated original. Was it a web download only? I can't remember) it has this to say:
"In prior decades, the skull was content to wait until touched; however, if any creature touches the treasure or the skull itself, it attacks with its soul suck power immediately, until it vanquishes all foes." So it at least acknowledges the original (and a DM could then play it that way), but turns it into a BBEG combat encounter. One thing that it did maintain was the original art, which I think WotC should have included for TftYP, at least as a free download.
The 4e version says:
"If the treasure in the crypt is touched, or ifthe characters linger here for 5 rounds, the construct becomes aware of their presence and attacks." It has an entirely new approach, with new combat abilities, randomly teleporting characters to new locations and attacking them there, his tactics "staying in the thick of the combat" and it's clearly a BBEG encounter.
I'm pretty sure it's the only adventure that has been published for every edition of D&D. None of the DMs that I know that ran the 5e one played or ran the original. Two of them started playing D&D in 4e, the others in 3e or 5e. Now that I look back at the 3e and 4e rewrites, it would make sense that somebody coming from either of those would expect him to attack outright. Don't know if any of these DMs had run the 3e or 4e versions, though. It's clear, though, that starting with 3e they shifted the encounter to a BBEG combat encounter. I am happy that 5e isn't forcing this, I just would have preferred more clarification for the DM. Because I still think that many DMs (and I know a few already) will miss that.
