| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 17 Sep 2013 : 03:42:26
Or even how do you go about choosing a hiding spot for your own? Can you hide it in a pocket plane with a preserved body waiting?
I have been thinking about this for awhile. The only novel based account I can think of regarding finding a high level Lich Phylactery is "resurrection".
Assume the Lich is a crafty SOB who has been around a long time. In Res, It was almost certain the Lichdrow would have hidden the phylactery in his own house. You never want the thing outside of your base of power.
But a lot of Liches may assume just that if they are ever in danger. What if they used a wish spell to create an unreachable pocket cave within a mountain or the underdark that only they know about and can only be reached by magical transportation? or, again, created their own little pocket plane to house the thing.
Permanent wards on the thing to prevent scrying it, etc
How do you go about finding a Lich like that's Phylactery to put him down for good? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 25 Sep 2013 : 04:51:31
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I propose that this lich‘s multi-phylactery might be a double-edged coin for purchasing immortality. (snip) At the very least, studying and disassembling such phylacteries might provide insights into how to duplicate them, or control or destroy the whole batch. (snip) A more subtle and dangerous possibility is that each time the lich further compartmentalizes and subdivides his already shattered soul and psyche, he risks insanity or destruction.
I like these ideas. I think it would be particularly cool if gaining custody gives the discerning holder a method of controlling the lich... a la truenames, from back in the day. Not hard to tie these ideas together; maybe the "runes and symbols" of power that the phylactery has to be inscribed with must include the lich's truename. The other symbols perform double duty as rituals of power and as a means of concealing the truename from sharpeyed and meddlesome do-gooders. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 25 Sep 2013 : 03:30:37
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I propose that this lich‘s multi-phylactery might be a double-edged coin for purchasing immortality. (snip) At the very least, studying and disassembling such phylacteries might provide insights into how to duplicate them, or control or destroy the whole batch. (snip) A more subtle and dangerous possibility is that each time the lich further compartmentalizes and subdivides his already shattered soul and psyche, he risks insanity or destruction.
I like these ideas. I think it would be particularly cool if gaining custody gives the discerning holder a method of controlling the lich... a la truenames, from back in the day. Not hard to tie these ideas together; maybe the "runes and symbols" of power that the phylactery has to be inscribed with must include the lich's truename. The other symbols perform double duty as rituals of power and as a means of concealing the truename from sharpeyed and meddlesome do-gooders.
Edit: it would not be easy for PCs to control liches this way... but it could be one of Larloch's several methods/tools to gather liches under his control. For most powerful mortals, even the likes of Elminster, it would play out like the Valsharess's "control" of Mephistopheles in NWN. Larloch can pull it off by virtue of the fact that he's older and smarter, at this point, than other liches. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 25 Sep 2013 : 03:05:33
I propose that this lich‘s multi-phylactery might be a double-edged coin for purchasing immortality. There is obvious advantage in redundant backups. The disadvantage might be that each and every one of these backups contains the whole essence of the lich‘s infinitely-dividable soul ... every single phylactery needs to be hidden and protected because any single one of them could provide sufficient magical affinity or resonance to backlash or destroy the lich. The proverbs state that all roads lead to Rome, and historians often note that invaders could reach Rome very easily by following these roads - I‘d think a lich would worry about littering the landscape with magical links bound to echoes of his soul.
Perhaps the reason is more prosaic: the spell or the spellcaster could have limited capacities which limit the maximum number of phylacteries in real practice. Not unlike watchware and so many other spells. Perhaps the lich himself doesn‘t know these limits, having never approached them. He might actually have fewer than a handful, for all we know.
At the very least, studying and disassembling such phylacteries might provide insights into how to duplicate them, or control or destroy the whole batch.
A more subtle and dangerous possibility is that each time the lich further compartmentalizes and subdivides his already shattered soul and psyche, he risks insanity or destruction.
Not all details need to be conveniently provided in the spell descriptor, at least not if it is restricted to one (or a few) epic NPCs. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 24 Sep 2013 : 20:20:21
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
This particular spell is meant to explain the advantages of one particular character.
Except that this advantage is "totally immortal, don't bother ever fighting him. Go slay all greater deities, that's less difficult"
With this spell there is no reason at all that Aumvar doesn't have well over 1,000,000 phylacteries by now.
He's over 2,000 years and can, for free, create 9 phylacteries per minute whenever he has a few minutes to spare.
"Hm, this magic experient needs to cook for 5 more minutes. Hm, why not create 45 new phylacteries to pass the time"
Ah but that's easy.
Aumvor has style, so he used as phylactery only the bones of Dethed, so he now has what? 206 phylacteries?
If someone starts destroying those then maybe he'll try to make more. |
| Mirtek |
Posted - 24 Sep 2013 : 20:06:47
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
This particular spell is meant to explain the advantages of one particular character.
Except that this advantage is "totally immortal, don't bother ever fighting him. Go slay all greater deities, that's less difficult"
With this spell there is no reason at all that Aumvar doesn't have well over 1,000,000 phylacteries by now.
He's over 2,000 years and can, for free, create 9 phylacteries per minute whenever he has a few minutes to spare.
"Hm, this magic experient needs to cook for 5 more minutes. Hm, why not create 45 new phylacteries to pass the time" |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 24 Sep 2013 : 18:19:48
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
...then eventually succumbed to mountains of accumulated misbalances as the years and the sourcebooks piled ever deeper.
+1 for insightful analysis. I hadn't thought about this before, but it makes good sense.
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
It is probably unique, and one can be sure its creator will protect it parsimoniously.
I agree. My earlier comment was aimed more at it being a low-DC and low-cost spell... it would be a simple matter for other powerful liches, such as Larloch or Szass, to have developed similar/identical spells through their own research.
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I don‘t think PCs should have access to every spell in the Realms
Hear, hear! |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 24 Sep 2013 : 18:13:24
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
That's why I find this spell ridiculously lame.
I agree that it should have some limits. I think investing a caster level in each phylactery is appropriate. An XP cost in addition is unnecessary, because the effect is already there... the caster is giving up a whole level of experience, until/unless the phylactery is destroyed. That's the most hefty XP cost anywhere in the game. And it fits nicely with the image of a lich gaining power (albeit with increasing vulnerability as well) with each phylactery destroyed. I disagree with limiting it to one cast per lich... let him divide his power as many times as he likes.
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
As it is it's not appropriate, not even for epic level liches. Could just as well rename it "Aumvar's true and total immortality through infinite phylacteries".
That does seem to be the effect of the spell as printed.
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
Maybe there should be an epic level spell capable of truly destroying a lich despite any remaining phylacteries
That would be epic indeed. I'm not opposed, but I think it would take some work to make the story aspect of it work. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Sep 2013 : 14:13:19
I think it‘s an error to assume the published spells are all “balanced“ well within the usual level-progression tiers, regardless where they are published. Each game edition from 2E onwards started off with an ambitious cleanup/rewrite effort which levelled the playing field, then eventually succumbed to mountains of accumulated misbalances as the years and the sourcebooks piled ever deeper.
This particular spell is meant to explain the advantages of one particular character. It is probably unique, and one can be sure its creator will protect it parsimoniously. I very much doubt this lich shares his key to immortality with other NPCs just because they‘re cool or powerful. I don‘t think PCs should have access to every spell in the Realms just because they can read canon spell descriptors. |
| Mirtek |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 18:43:50
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Finally got back to looking at this... nifty spell. I like that it's easy to cast. Trivial, really. Seems likely that Larloch and Szass and others have this spell or ones like it as well.
It's made kinda ridiculous by having no upper limit on the number of phylacteries, and requiring no sacrifice in terms of effective caster level or spell slots or anything else. No XP cost to cast. (I wouldn't like it if it did require those; I just think it's noteworthy that it doesn't).
There's also apparently no requirement that the objects remain in proximity to each other or the lich. So (in 3e at least) they could theoretically be flung far and wide across the cosmos, making it effectively impossible for the PCs to ever completely destroy a lich. Although we are talking about epic-level liches, so that's appropriate.
That's why I find this spell ridiculously lame.
It should have all of these (sacrifices in terms of effective caster level or spell slots XP cost to cast, etc.) and should only work once for any given lich (with the number of additional phylacteries depending on caster level at time of casting and sacrifice to power the spell).
As it is it's not appropriate, not even for epic level liches. Could just as well rename it "Aumvar's true and total immortality through infinite phylacteries".
Every lich capable of casting this spell can create at last 7,200 additional phylacteries per day. Just spend a week of your immortal life and you've got >50,000 phylacteries at no costs!
Not even greater deities are that immortal.
Maybe there should be an epic level spell capable of truly destroying a lich despite any remaining phylacteries to counter this abomination of a spell |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 15:19:55
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Maybe i'm hopelessly wrong but a lich's phylactery can't be just anything.
The DM's needs/wants trump the rulebooks, imo. It's better for the story, for the reason you list below, for any object to be eligible to become a phylactery.
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
From what i remember it has to have a high minimum value in gold pieces and during the process of ... err ... phylacteryzation ... the would be lich must wrap it up with words of power, runes, symbols and all the usual magical thingamajig, making it fairly recognizable at first sight.
I remember something like that too, but it was probably from 1e or 2e. In the 3.5 Monster Manual it just says the phylactery costs 120,000 gp to create... that doesn't mean it has intrinsic value before the process starts... or even that it has to be a physical object before the process starts.
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
After that the lich can plant an illusion or transmutation spell on it, sure, but then True Seeing, Arcane Sight and company will detect it without effort, and i expect a party looking for a lich's philactery to scan the lich's lair(s) with this spells and more.
For this reason, if I were a lich, I would favor physical alterations over illusions. Every phylactery looking the same is not an acceptable or logical outcome.
Afterthought: transmutations would fool true sight. They change the actual object, not just the appearance. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 12:46:28
No need to invent a bicycle. There's already Detect Metals and Minerals for this.  |
| Demzer |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 10:20:31
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
From what i remember it has to have a high minimum value in gold pieces
Eh, i just came up with another spell useful for looting and phylactery hunting:
Plunderer's Sense: this spells works like the detect ... spells for range/area of effects/duration/etc... and detects anything whose real value is above 100 GP:
- 1st round of concentration: the spell finds all items worth more than 100 GP without notification to the caster
- 2nd round of concentration: the spell highlights all items worth more than 100 GP with a fairy fire effect and a low humming sound
- 3rd round of concentration and beyond: with an appraise skill check (DC = GP value/1000) the caster can raise the GP limit of the spell and have items worth more than the new limit highlighted by the fairy fire and humming sound.
The trick here is that anything the changes how the items looks like illusion and transmutation spells, are ineffective against Plunderer's Sense while spells that alter items magic auras still work.
So the spell will react on the 100/200/300 GP limit for a +5 vorpal longsword of doom enchanted with Nystul's thinking it's just a masterwork longsword, meawhile the phylactery will always be highlighted as a base item worth X thousand gold pieces, regardless of the enchantments on it. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 10:03:39
Maybe i'm hopelessly wrong but a lich's phylactery can't be just anything.
From what i remember it has to have a high minimum value in gold pieces and during the process of ... err ... phylacteryzation ... the would be lich must wrap it up with words of power, runes, symbols and all the usual magical thingamajig, making it fairly recognizable at first sight.
After that the lich can plant an illusion or transmutation spell on it, sure, but then True Seeing, Arcane Sight and company will detect it without effort, and i expect a party looking for a lich's philactery to scan the lich's lair(s) with this spells and more. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 01:54:23
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
The Murlynd's spoon that's been polished and glamered to look like pure gold, but once a simple dispel is cast on it is revealed to be "merely" a magic copper spoon... in life, he was once lost in a desert, and this spoon kept him alive for the two years it took to find his way out. Now, when his bones are broken and his foes think him vanquished, a piece of his spirit lurks herein. No spells (other than detect magic) regardless of level should draw any attention at all to the spoon.
And in what obviously is a backpack of some dead adventurer, stuffed in a dusty closet along with another ten.
Stuffing a phylactery in some useful minor enchanted item is a classical move.
Another classical solution is a weak, but gaudy item sold to some rich clown along with a handful of others.
Potentially it can work even better - all the lich needs to find a fresh corpse with no suspicions is to add some mind-affecting magic. The inhabited trinket provokes a theft when needed, then nudges the next shady guys met to fight over the loot and then do something stupid enough that the last of them would get caught. An airtight case, happens all the time, no thorough magical investigation is necessary. The thief's corpse (or better some other claimant's) is up for grabs, the trinket returns to its visible (and tempting other thieves) place until the next time.
In which case, even if you somehow find it, you still need to convince a noble or rich merchant that he needs to part with a piece of his/her family jewelry that clearly helped them more than once down the generations. Good luck with that.  Even if it didn't slip suggestions to the wearer and/or everyone around all the time. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 23 Sep 2013 : 00:07:33
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Eric Boyd came up with a spell for a fragmented phylactery in his write-up of Aumvor the Undying in "Champions of Ruin".
-- George Krashos
Finally got back to looking at this... nifty spell. I like that it's easy to cast. Trivial, really. Seems likely that Larloch and Szass and others have this spell or ones like it as well.
It's made kinda ridiculous by having no upper limit on the number of phylacteries, and requiring no sacrifice in terms of effective caster level or spell slots or anything else. No XP cost to cast. (I wouldn't like it if it did require those; I just think it's noteworthy that it doesn't).
There's also apparently no requirement that the objects remain in proximity to each other or the lich. So (in 3e at least) they could theoretically be flung far and wide across the cosmos, making it effectively impossible for the PCs to ever completely destroy a lich. Although we are talking about epic-level liches, so that's appropriate.
I still like the idea that liches are able to have multiple phylacteries without the use of this spell, but it's possible that it's just the evil DM speaking. For the canon rules this spell enables smart liches (as opposed to the insane ones, who mostly wouldn't last to reach epic levels anyway) to be effectively unbeatable.
I dunno if anyone else has this spell. Might be easy, but likely took a lot of research and special attentiveness. if everyone had this spell, Liches would be impossible to kill.
Larloch has the freaking Phylactery bank. Well, not really, but it works that way. 60+ phylacteries being guarded by that many liches lol. I have heard of safety in numbers, but good lord. These are not weak liches either. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 21 Sep 2013 : 20:16:50
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Eric Boyd came up with a spell for a fragmented phylactery in his write-up of Aumvor the Undying in "Champions of Ruin".
-- George Krashos
Finally got back to looking at this... nifty spell. I like that it's easy to cast. Trivial, really. Seems likely that Larloch and Szass and others have this spell or ones like it as well.
It's made kinda ridiculous by having no upper limit on the number of phylacteries, and requiring no sacrifice in terms of effective caster level or spell slots or anything else. No XP cost to cast. (I wouldn't like it if it did require those; I just think it's noteworthy that it doesn't).
There's also apparently no requirement that the objects remain in proximity to each other or the lich. So (in 3e at least) they could theoretically be flung far and wide across the cosmos, making it effectively impossible for the PCs to ever completely destroy a lich. Although we are talking about epic-level liches, so that's appropriate.
I still like the idea that liches are able to have multiple phylacteries without the use of this spell, but it's possible that it's just the evil DM speaking. For the canon rules this spell enables smart liches (as opposed to the insane ones, who mostly wouldn't last to reach epic levels anyway) to be effectively unbeatable. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 21 Sep 2013 : 19:48:35
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm not saying that the phylactery should be unprotected or easy to find -- I'm just saying that the best efforts of the PCs shouldn't be rendered absolutely pointless by the simplest, most mundane method.
I'm not really trying to argue the point, but it seems like the whole point of offering the PCs a ranged spell is to make it easier for them to find. In fact, the whole point of letting them use magic in the effort at all is to make it easier on them.
The following is just my take on it, returning to the idea of multiple phylacteries.
It should always be difficult to defeat a lich... I think even the wimpiest lich should have a 2-3 point CR lead over any PCs sent to destroy it, and they should almost never be encountered without a pile of minions to whittle down the PCs' resources until they abruptly find themselves facing the lich while they're at 25% strength with only a couple of potions left. A lich should be a B.F.D.
And that's just the beginning. Once you've knocked it down, then you have to keep it down. A standard single-phylactery lich that keeps its phylactery in its lair, in the interest of keeping physical control over it, is the easiest type of lich to defeat. Chomp through its hit points, bash its phylactery, count up the loot. That kind of lich doesn't even deserve to be a lich. (Unless it's secretly not a standard single-phylactery lich, and it has other means of coming back.)
A better lich is one with 10 lairs, 8 of which are airless pockets deep underground, lacking any entry for most foes. Portals may connect a few of the lairs, enabling guardian creatures to move back and forth. But there are no visual indications of other lairs... no teleportation circles or obvious portal arches. There will be devices, of all different appearances, which facilitate teleport-on-command... provided that you know the command word and identify the destination, and very subject to your familiarity with the destination. Obviously the lich knows his lairs very well. The PCs will be faced with (1) figuring out that the objects are teleport devices, (2) figuring out the command words, since they're not written anywhere in the lair, (3) getting familiar enough with the destination to teleport. How they're going to manage that is their concern. All the DM has to do is provide the means for them to get that knowledge, and some clues so that they're not completely in the dark; it's up to them to find and utilize the information, or not.
There is loot in each lair... some valuable, most not, all of it disguised to appear more interesting than it is... more than enough stuff to accomplish the goal that nobody says "hey this isn't enough loot; obviously he has another lair." Most of it, including everything the lich doesn't personally use, is also cursed in some way.
In several but not all of the lairs, scattered amongst the loot, is one item of singular importance. Just one of thousands of items, disguised to appear more awesome than it is, and probably layered with curses... a phylactery. Other items will appear more likely to be phylacteries, and each will utilize various means to deceive PCs into thinking that they're the important item.
The Murlynd's spoon that's been polished and glamered to look like pure gold, but once a simple dispel is cast on it is revealed to be "merely" a magic copper spoon... in life, he was once lost in a desert, and this spoon kept him alive for the two years it took to find his way out. Now, when his bones are broken and his foes think him vanquished, a piece of his spirit lurks herein. No spells (other than detect magic) regardless of level should draw any attention at all to the spoon.
If the PCs have asked questions, consulted sages and tracked down lost history books and journals, and done a decent amount of legwork (and in so doing, earned the levels to actually defeat the lich) they'll know to look for a spoon. They will also, incidentally, have found hints and even some diagrams of his other lairs, increasing their odds of successfully teleporting to them. Chances are good that there won't be a lot of spoons in a lich's lair. Fifty decoy spoons would be suspicious, but one is easily ignored, particularly when it turns out to be a magic spoon; it's just loot like any other magic item. Maybe the PCs will have a chuckle about the irony of a Murlynd's spoon in an undead creature's lair. So if they've done their homework, they'll find the answer. If not, they most likely won't. That is as it should be.
The decanter of endless water that the mortal once used to drown his mother, after which he was able to read her spellbooks at his leisure and teach himself to wield magic... another phylactery, in another lair, perhaps at the bottom of a subterranean lake surrounding a tower in which he keeps the wretched remains of his sister (now a variant vampire who can't fly or survive the touch of water).
Once those two are destroyed, there's only 8 more to go, right? Well, no, because there are 13 phylacteries, one for each century that he's been a lich, and he only keeps 6 among his ten lairs; 4 others are scattered around the world, and three have been carried by ignorant adventurers into other Primes or other planes.
As the PCs destroy phylacteries, more and more of the lich's power is focused within his physical form, meaning that he gets more powerful each time they face him.
Hopefully, for their sake, they've acquired enough power by the time they destroy all the phylacteries to kill him one final time.
tl;dr: I think this discussion boils down to an issue of perspective. Do you see the lich as just another monster... or as one of the insidious horrors of the world? |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 21 Sep 2013 : 15:22:34
It sounds like the phylactery finder spell I mentioned at the beginning and TBeholder's spell he's mentioning work on similar principles. Essentially, mine was like "show a line from my life force to all other life forces in the area" and it would show a bigger line based on general lvl/hit dice (so it was easier to tell the difference between say a rabbit or a lion. Additionally, it would color the line based on the life force's type (green plant, white animal, blue extraplanar, grey undead). This could get annoying, because the line took the direct path, so it would go through walls, etc... |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 21 Sep 2013 : 15:07:59
quote:
Originally posted by Firestorm
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
In 2nd edition, I created a spell ... I know I had a cool name, but lets just call it phylactery compass for now because I can't think of it... and its purpose was simply to provide a guiding light in the direction of any spirit material entrapped in a vessel (so magic jars, gem-entrapped souls, phylacteries, etc...).
I thought of another solution: a divination that would track (in either direction) lifeforce links - such as wizard with familiar, dryad with her tree, hamatree caster with the target tree, one elven spirit-link participant with another, cursed/bound item with the owner, lich with phylactery.
Maybe touch-ranged.
Of course, there are ways to circumvent "touch range" limitation, but it still makes things non-trivial, doesn't it?
But most liches would heavily enchant their phylacteries against Divination
Yes, they'd have their phylacteries warded against spells looking for THEM (as in scrying for a lich or X named individual). A spell to generically point out generally where spirits are "residing"/contained would be a totally different type of spell. Yes, it would be a divination (as in the school), but it would not be a Divination (as in a targeted effect on said individual to learn information about them). This has long been a limitation of the language used in spells created within the category of divination spells... they need to start using different synonyms to provide better clarity. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 21 Sep 2013 : 02:35:43
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
In this kind of situation is very important how the DM handles the interaction between divination and illusion spells.
Personally i hate spells that have absolute results ("this spell prevents all divinations" or "this spell reveals everything") so outside level 8 and 9 spells all the other illusion spells work flawlessly against lower and same level spells and force a caster level check against higher level spells with a bonus equal to spell level except for very specialized spells (undetectable alignment beats all the detect alignment spells, Nystul's magic aura beats identify but only forces a caster level check against analyze dweomer).
With this house rule in mind finding a lich's phylactery isn't completely impossible even if the lich has done is homework and has used all known (Players Handbook) illusion spells. With a bit of luck, time and perseverance an appropriate level party should be able to figure things out with spells. The problem here is of course the time it takes to find the phylactery.
Personally, if at the moment of the lich's death someone in the party is using detect magic, detect evil or arcane sight (greater) i make them see the faint trace of the soul of the evil spellcaster drifting away, and this can give the party an hint of the direction to follow.
A resourcefull party may even employ zone of truth and similar spells together with speak with dead to question the former body of the lich itself.
Spells like commune, contact other planes, divination, legend lore and vision can all be used to get a better idea of where a lich may have hidden his phylactery without bouncing against illusions or protection spells.
Once on the site spells like analyze dweomer, arcane sight (greater) and the one that creates the flying eyeballs with true seeing can help scout it quickly, even speak with ... spells may be used to question vermins/rats/snakes/bats/plants/undead servitors or whatever is whitin the lair to learn where the lich routinely cast spells and narrow the search field.
It's important to remember that Nystul's magic aura and similar spells can't completely shield powerfull auras and (depending on the level of the lich) the soul of evil liches may very well still radiate an aura faint enough to be picked up by the detect ... spells.
If the party is positive they're in the right lair they may use less precise and more quick methods like blasting everything with low level damaging spells and see what survives the blasts and later commune or contact other planes to be sure they destroyed the right gem studded gold goblet covered in runes and resistant to fire.
On the other side of the fence the most important thing for a lich is to protect its phylactery long enough to form/possess a new body so the best defense for a phylactery isn't always magical but geographical.
The lich may decide to fly for months and make it's phylactery's lair on an unnamed mountain peak or in a series of submerged sea caves far off from trade routes and fishing villages.
Stuffing the lair with a bunch of preserved corpses, a spell book or two, some magic items and then filling the place with symbol ... spells is the norm.
The lair may even be filled with traps not intended to hurt the adventurers too much but to halt their progress (causing collapses, cave ins, forest fires, floods, etc...).
Another weapon in a lich arsenal is of course deception, like wearing an ostentatious rune covered amulet or ring enspelled with a contingency spell that teleports it away in a conveniently easier to locate but difficult to ge to lair when your body is going to die.
The adventurers will probably search for the amulet first since they saw it and familiarity with items helps divination magic, and this will give the lich precious time as long as they search for the fake.
Or better, they will destroy the fake during the fight then kill you and go home thinking their work is over and you were a particularly stupid lich.
Another trick is to use your treasure pile as a decoy and to gain time: while the adventurers fight against your mimics to claim your hoard, argue about how to take with them magic resistant huge solid gold statues or run to priests to remove all the cursed gear they just looted and equipped, you, the lich, get one step closer to showing up again for a rematch.
I like a lot of this! |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 21:46:48
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
The idea is that if it's not detection-type ("where's X?") effect, but the opposite ("I'm here, now where's everything else?")
Uh, you lost me here.
What i understood about this spell is its purpose: find spirit-links.
What i didn't is the whole touch-range debate: what does the caster need to touch during the casting?
The known component of the link. The caster touches it, variant "Know Location" spell goes into it, then pokes through the first link it can find and reports "I'm here!" back from the other side.
A gadgetry counterpart would be sending a GPS-enabled bug into a portal - it doesn't matter how perfectly the place on the other end is concealed from external observation: if the bug can find out where it is and report, the job is done; if it was a lead-walled chamber under a mountain, you get nothing, but can eliminate any possible places that aren't heavily screened.
The method obviously still does leave room for ambiguity if the caster can't say which present links are "uninteresting" - but why not?
(In only slightly ludicrous case of an excentric elf wizard/priest in 2e FR there can be: familiar + homunculous + hamatree + elven spirit-link + moonblade or other linked weapon = 5 voluntary connections at once, and of course "magic jar" and "that preciousss piece of jewelry I won't take out of my pocketses until we're alone" are also options, plus maybe psionic contacts, both incoming and outbound.)
quote:
The object you want to know if it's spirit-linked?
Then 1) you need to know which object to touch already or go on and waste casts touching everything (thus partly defeating the purpose of the spell)
[...]If the spell is "i cast the spell and i become instantly aware of spirit-links in x-feet range (originating or passing within range)" then there's nothing to touch and the spell is range self and area of effect x-feet radius sphere centered on the caster.
That's actually a good point. This could be addressed by some "Detect Spirit Link" area-scanning detection spell indeed. Of course, it could only say yes/no unless the other half is also in AoE. Also, it should be either a plain detection spell beatable as such via conventional means, or find links via "leaks" (if we look for "columns don't match here!", non-specific protections can't do much), but this should work only after a scanned object/creature fail resistance and saving throw, if any.
In the original contexts, however, "Trace Spirit Link" is cast on a lichnee because we know one must have the phylactery, and in the same vein can be reasonably sure with a homunculous (they usually are created pre-bound) or this particular elf (she said she has a spirit-link partner). It's possible that the result in case of an elf or familiar/homunculous will be "no outbound path is accessible at this time", but this also says something.
quote:
The dead lich's body?
But an inactive lich body doesn't have a link with any phylactery (unless the lich is currently moving into it, anyway). Which is exactly why "touch range" would present enough of a problem that the spell doesn't become overkill. And why there was a "" smiley in my original proposal, obviously. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 15:38:29
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
The idea is that if it's not detection-type ("where's X?") effect, but the opposite ("I'm here, now where's everything else?")
Uh, you lost me here.
What i understood about this spell is its purpose: find spirit-links.
What i didn't is the whole touch-range debate: what does the caster need to touch during the casting?
The object you want to know if it's spirit-linked?
Then 1) you need to know which object to touch already or go on and waste casts touching everything (thus partly defeating the purpose of the spell) 2) Wooly's objection about thick layers of matter or simply boxes blocking the spell is true since you're not touching the phylactery but the container.
The spirit-link itself?
In this case i can't help but imagine the caster wildly flailing his arms trying to touch something incorporeal.
The caster him/herself?
Then it's not touch-range but rather self.
The dead lich's body?
This one may work.
If the spell is "i cast the spell and i become instantly aware of spirit-links in x-feet range (originating or passing within range)" then there's nothing to touch and the spell is range self and area of effect x-feet radius sphere centered on the caster. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 14:50:11
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
My point is that physical detection methods could be defeated by the simplest, most trivial mundane means. A toddler could unintentionally defeat touch-based detection by simply dropping something over the phylactery.
You still did not read. 
No, I read it. And I still don't see why a DM would offer a detection method that he knew would never work. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 14:19:58
In this kind of situation is very important how the DM handles the interaction between divination and illusion spells.
Personally i hate spells that have absolute results ("this spell prevents all divinations" or "this spell reveals everything") so outside level 8 and 9 spells all the other illusion spells work flawlessly against lower and same level spells and force a caster level check against higher level spells with a bonus equal to spell level except for very specialized spells (undetectable alignment beats all the detect alignment spells, Nystul's magic aura beats identify but only forces a caster level check against analyze dweomer).
With this house rule in mind finding a lich's phylactery isn't completely impossible even if the lich has done is homework and has used all known (Players Handbook) illusion spells. With a bit of luck, time and perseverance an appropriate level party should be able to figure things out with spells. The problem here is of course the time it takes to find the phylactery.
Personally, if at the moment of the lich's death someone in the party is using detect magic, detect evil or arcane sight (greater) i make them see the faint trace of the soul of the evil spellcaster drifting away, and this can give the party an hint of the direction to follow.
A resourcefull party may even employ zone of truth and similar spells together with speak with dead to question the former body of the lich itself.
Spells like commune, contact other planes, divination, legend lore and vision can all be used to get a better idea of where a lich may have hidden his phylactery without bouncing against illusions or protection spells.
Once on the site spells like analyze dweomer, arcane sight (greater) and the one that creates the flying eyeballs with true seeing can help scout it quickly, even speak with ... spells may be used to question vermins/rats/snakes/bats/plants/undead servitors or whatever is whitin the lair to learn where the lich routinely cast spells and narrow the search field.
It's important to remember that Nystul's magic aura and similar spells can't completely shield powerfull auras and (depending on the level of the lich) the soul of evil liches may very well still radiate an aura faint enough to be picked up by the detect ... spells.
If the party is positive they're in the right lair they may use less precise and more quick methods like blasting everything with low level damaging spells and see what survives the blasts and later commune or contact other planes to be sure they destroyed the right gem studded gold goblet covered in runes and resistant to fire.
On the other side of the fence the most important thing for a lich is to protect its phylactery long enough to form/possess a new body so the best defense for a phylactery isn't always magical but geographical.
The lich may decide to fly for months and make it's phylactery's lair on an unnamed mountain peak or in a series of submerged sea caves far off from trade routes and fishing villages.
Stuffing the lair with a bunch of preserved corpses, a spell book or two, some magic items and then filling the place with symbol ... spells is the norm.
The lair may even be filled with traps not intended to hurt the adventurers too much but to halt their progress (causing collapses, cave ins, forest fires, floods, etc...).
Another weapon in a lich arsenal is of course deception, like wearing an ostentatious rune covered amulet or ring enspelled with a contingency spell that teleports it away in a conveniently easier to locate but difficult to ge to lair when your body is going to die.
The adventurers will probably search for the amulet first since they saw it and familiarity with items helps divination magic, and this will give the lich precious time as long as they search for the fake.
Or better, they will destroy the fake during the fight then kill you and go home thinking their work is over and you were a particularly stupid lich.
Another trick is to use your treasure pile as a decoy and to gain time: while the adventurers fight against your mimics to claim your hoard, argue about how to take with them magic resistant huge solid gold statues or run to priests to remove all the cursed gear they just looted and equipped, you, the lich, get one step closer to showing up again for a rematch. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 14:06:38
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
My point is that physical detection methods could be defeated by the simplest, most trivial mundane means. A toddler could unintentionally defeat touch-based detection by simply dropping something over the phylactery.
You still did not read. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 13:38:42
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Touch-based detection could be thwarted by a thick piece of parchment. You'd be better off not even bothering with it -- why waste a spell or equipment slot on something that could be accidentally defeated by a piece of cloth?
The whole point (in this context) being the ability to circumvent unbeatable immunities to detection via conventional methods?..
quote:
A ranged detection method could be defeated, but it would take more effort than just giftwrapping the phylactery.
Exactly the point..? Uh, did you read it? Or re-read what you wrote here? 
The idea is that if it's not detection-type ("where's X?") effect, but the opposite ("I'm here, now where's everything else?"), thus protections blocking specifically "where's X?" forms of location are simply not appliable - it requires blocking navigation-type effects (including True Compass spell, psionic Know Location, etc) or another superset ("any Divination magic", "all Weave spells up to 9 level") in the remote target's area.
Of course, requiring access to the remote object via a backdoor means that whatever/whoever carries the local end of that link must be affected (fail resistance and saving throw) first before the spell may reach through the link and "look out of" the remote part. But that's a reasonable level of inconvenience, IMHO, for a method both bypassing nondetection effects and ambiguity/decoys ("there are 30 trinkets exactly like this in circulation, which one you have located?" - it was specifically noted in the description of drow House Insignia).
My point is that physical detection methods could be defeated by the simplest, most trivial mundane means. A toddler could unintentionally defeat touch-based detection by simply dropping something over the phylactery. If a detection method could be accidentally defeated by a piece of paper, what's the point of it?
Stashing something under your pillow shouldn't be just as effective as putting it in Fort Knox.
Ranged-based detection could also be thwarted, but it requires deliberate effort. The anti-detection could still be overcome by crafty PCs, but this would require creativity and work on their part.
Touch-based detection could be defeated by something as simple as a ceramic coating or gold plating -- so the only way the PCs could defeat that would be to hack up everything they find. If they don't make a point of destroying every single piece of furniture, art object, or stone in a lich's lair, they may never be able to find the phylactery.
The PCs could go thru all the effort of beating the lich, they could spend weeks trying to find the phylactery, and never accomplish this goal because of a thin layer of balsa wood. That's not challenging PCs -- that's torturing and frustrating them.
I'm not saying that the phylactery should be unprotected or easy to find -- I'm just saying that the best efforts of the PCs shouldn't be rendered absolutely pointless by the simplest, most mundane method. |
| _Jarlaxle_ |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 12:27:10
Maybe the spell could work like displaying the link between the caster and the object as some kind of shimering band only visible to the caster for the duration of the spell. This way he would have to follow it until he finds the other end and if the other end is protected by some anti-devination magic the band will end somewhere in the air as if the protection creates some kind of bubble around the object and you know at least the rough location of it. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 06:38:57
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Touch-based detection could be thwarted by a thick piece of parchment. You'd be better off not even bothering with it -- why waste a spell or equipment slot on something that could be accidentally defeated by a piece of cloth?
The whole point (in this context) being the ability to circumvent unbeatable immunities to detection via conventional methods?..
quote:
A ranged detection method could be defeated, but it would take more effort than just giftwrapping the phylactery.
Exactly the point..? Uh, did you read it? Or re-read what you wrote here?
The idea is that if it's not detection-type ("where's X?") effect, but the opposite ("I'm here, now where's everything else?"), thus protections blocking specifically "where's X?" forms of location are simply not appliable - it requires blocking navigation-type effects (including True Compass spell, psionic Know Location, etc) or another superset ("any Divination magic", "all Weave spells up to 9 level") in the remote target's area.
Of course, requiring access to the remote object via a backdoor means that whatever/whoever carries the local end of that link must be affected (fail resistance and saving throw) first before the spell may reach through the link and "look out of" the remote part. But that's a reasonable level of inconvenience, IMHO, for a method both bypassing nondetection effects and ambiguity/decoys ("there are 30 trinkets exactly like this in circulation, which one you have located?" - it was specifically noted in the description of drow House Insignia). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 01:36:13
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I know it's off-topic, but this discussion makes me wonder how PCs would ever find an amulet of proof against detection and location ... a precious trinket which radiates non-detection, it would probably be liquidated at the closest merchant NPC after PCs cast detect magic to pull the good stuff out of their loot pile.
More on-topic, liches are acutely aware of how much of a liability their phylactery can be. In fact, they probably studied a little anti-lich psychology back in their living days if they acquired their archmastery of magic through adventure. They might fashion their phylactery as a precious magical item, even perhaps a jewel-encrusted tome filled with their mightiest spells. Realms canon includes a dracolich whose phylactery is a gemstone set within the pommel of a powerful intelligent dragonslaying blade, thus assuring a body will eventually become available if the previous one was slain by mighty adventurers.
Personally, I think a smarter lich would present attackers with a false phylactery. Few PCs would worry much about a vengeful lich after bypassing the traps, defeating the guardians, and finally blasting the "cleverly-hidden" and "well-protected" glowing necromantic soul orb thing they found in the secret panel behind a lich's favourite shelf of spellbooks.
If I was creating a lich, he'd definitely do the well-protected decoy trick, with the real one very well hidden indeed.
Dretchroyaster's trick with the sword is an excellent one. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 20 Sep 2013 : 01:10:30
I know it's off-topic, but this discussion makes me wonder how PCs would ever find an amulet of proof against detection and location ... a precious trinket which radiates non-detection, it would probably be liquidated at the closest merchant NPC after PCs cast detect magic to pull the good stuff out of their loot pile.
More on-topic, liches are acutely aware of how much of a liability their phylactery can be. In fact, they probably studied a little anti-lich psychology back in their living days if they acquired their archmastery of magic through adventure. They might fashion their phylactery as a precious magical item, even perhaps a jewel-encrusted tome filled with their mightiest spells. Realms canon includes a dracolich whose phylactery is a gemstone set within the pommel of a powerful intelligent dragonslaying blade, thus assuring a body will eventually become available if the previous one was slain by mighty adventurers.
Personally, I think a smarter lich would present attackers with a false phylactery. Few PCs would worry much about a vengeful lich after bypassing the traps, defeating the guardians, and finally blasting the "cleverly-hidden" and "well-protected" glowing necromantic soul orb thing they found in the secret panel behind a lich's favourite shelf of spellbooks. |
|
|
