I'm trying to work some Arazni stuff into an upcoming PbP. I don't quite get why Aroden threw her to the wolves and forsook her.
1 - He let her be summoned to battle Tar Baphon. That went poorly, according to Gods and Magic, as Tar Baphon: "toyed with her for days before snuffing out her life and hurling her broken body into the
opposing army." (reminds me a bit of Hector and Achilles)
Having previously defeated Tar Baphon himself, shouldn't Aroden have had some inkling she was overmatched?
2 - Then he lets Geb take the body of his FORMER HERALD and turn her into the 'Harlot Queen of Geb.' Now she's an evil lich and basically the concubine of a super-evil ghost.
These two events took place 700-800 years before Aroden's death. Shouldn't he have handled it a bit differently; either in #1 or #2 above? Especially #2?
Unless he had wanted to get rid of his herald (in which case his actions make somes sense), she seems to have been shafted by her patron. With horrifying consequences.
She was actually a minor deity on her own, which still put here on Demon Lord category at worse, which is still too much for most any mortal to deal with. She also agreed to go there, and the Tar Baphon that Aroden fought was not as powerful as the one that she fought so I am assuming he did not know how strong TB was.
I will also add that deities are not really supposed to directly involved in the affairs of mortals. I am surprised he did not get in trouble for fighting TB the first time, and with his herald doing the same thing it would make sense that maybe the other gods told him to not get involved or else.
I don't remember the exact wording, but I believe in the Bestiary, it says Demon Lords (whom are Demi-Gods) are, at minimum, CR 26. Keeping that in mind, and that Arazni's current stars are CR 20+ it seems for Tar-Baphon to be so much more powerful than her that he could toy with her for days seems really odd. I mean, I would almost say he's close to a CR 30 creature, and considering Achaekek, the Assassin of the Gods is also CR 30, it's kind of disturbing. It also begs the question, how the hell is it possible for mortals to have actually sealed him away?
Tar-Baphon is powerful enough to defeat demi-gods with relative ease, so for mortals to have actually sealed him away seems pretty far-fetched.
However, I do agree that Arazni got the shaft. Granted, Aroden might have been forbidden to aid her against Tar-Baphon, but it seems odd that all the other heralds re-appear next to their gods side when they die. The fact that Arazni didn't is kind of disturbing and makes you wonder what happened. Perhaps Tar-Baphon didn't just kill her, but broke her mentally? Turned her to the Dark Side for example. Maybe that's why he allowed her body to be stolen and reanimated. The other option is that Tar-Baphon is singularly so powerful that he can halt the magics behind Arazni's reappearance. Again, begging the question of how mortals could possibly have stopped a creature so powerful he can overcome the will of Gods.
A demi-god(on par with nascent demon lords) and a minor deity(on par with actual demon lords) are not the same thing, IIRC. Arazni was actually a minor deity and could reasonably be defeated by Orcus(demon lord), but not by Treerazor(nascent demon lord).
Bar-Taphon going from very power mortal to "demon lord level of power" is a pretty big jump.
The other heralds don't return to their god when they die, not if they actually show up anyway. If they are summoned(the real you does not show up), assuming you can even summon one, then it might be possible.
|
There are other ways to stop such an evil without direct combat, or if combat is an option, there are always alliances to be made, artifacts to be had, and ways to weaken that evil. Tar-Baphon is supposed to be that scary BECAUSE he was a mortal (and then immortal, but not divine) and he DID beat Arazni.
Perhaps it was in the Fates, so to speak? Maybe Aroden DID want to help, but could not. Maybe Tar-Baphon, Arazni and the Death of Aroden are all part of a web that will play out in the future... perhaps soon, instigated by the actions of an unlikely band of Heroes? Pharasma says nothing, but she knows something. I think 'how can we beat him' is exactly the point, and PCs will have to go above and beyond to find a way. Without pulling in the subject, reminds me of a thread I recently posted equating Tar-Baphon to a sort of Sauron - and of course, in that tale, he was beaten by a Hobbit.
On a lighter note, you could always lure that Azathoth cult that's been pestering you all Campaign to a showdown at the same spot he is emerging from his broken Seal and LET them succeed as summoning the Nuclear Chaos...
That might do the trick ;)
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Arazni's power level when she was a deity was actually more akin to a nascent demon lord—so something on par with Treerazer. Somewhere in the CR 21 to CR 25 range.
Heralds of the gods are universally CR 15 creatures with 18 HD, which makes them fit the role of "A tough on-theme creature for a cleric to conjure via greater planar ally." So while we've called Arazni Aroden's herald before... that's not exactly accurate. It's more the use of the word as nothing more than a description of something being a "messenger" or "agent" of a god, rather than a specific monster role.
As for why she was let to the wolves... that's one of the great tragic stories of the Inner Sea history. One that we may someday explore more in detail.
A demi-god(on par with nascent demon lords) and a minor deity(on par with actual demon lords) are not the same thing, IIRC. Arazni was actually a minor deity and could reasonably be defeated by Orcus(demon lord), but not by Treerazor(nascent demon lord).
Bar-Taphon going from very power mortal to "demon lord level of power" is a pretty big jump.
Straight out of the Bestiary on Page 60
"A balor lord is typically a CR 21 to CR 25 monster (a
range shared with the various unique nascent demon
lords, with the range of CR 26 and above being the domain
of the demon lords themselves)..."
Not that big a jump really. But you did correct me on Arazni being a minor-deity meaning Tar-Baphon basically is, at minimum, a CR 26 encounter.
The other heralds don't return to their god when they die, not if they actually show up anyway. If they are summoned(the real you does not show up), assuming you can even summon one, then it might be possible.
The Lawgiver is given stats in Seven Days to the Grave and in there, and on the PFSRD under Morale it states:
"Morale: The herald of the god of law fights until its master commands it to retreat or it is destroyed. Even if killed, though, the herald reappears at Abadar’s side 1 day later."
The Steward of the Skein, Pharasma's herald, also reappears if slain.
Sunlord Thalacos, Sarenrae's herald is "immortal and renewed everyday"
The Prince in Chains, Zon-Kuthon's herald, reappears 1d6 days later at his lord's side if slain.
Mother's Maw, Urgathoa's herald, is deathless and returns to unlife 1 hour later unless slain by positive energy.
The Emperor of Scales, Ydersius' herald, might also resurrect. It's not explicitly stated but:
"...he also represents the god’s immortality, for even in defeat Ydersius was not slain, and even without a body, the Emperor of Scales still serves..."
While not every Herald is resurrected when slain, several of them are.
____________________
Spells like Raise Dead, Resurrection etc. do not work on those that are unwilling to return to life. However, Ged was responsible for "reanimating her corpse as a debased lich" so maybe it doesn't work the same. However, a being of her power, I think, couldn't be reanimated unless she chose too. Unless of course, Geb is similar in power to that of Tar-Baphon and minor-deities are just playthings to them.
I don't know, the more I think about it the more I begin to believe that Arazni was broken by Tar-Baphon and she turned evil, which is why she was willing to be reanimated by Geb.
Pfft, James would come and usurp my point as I'm doing more research into the other heralds. :P
Arazni's power level when she was a deity was actually more akin to a nascent demon lord—so something on par with Treerazer. Somewhere in the CR 21 to CR 25 range.
Heralds of the gods are universally CR 15 creatures with 18 HD, which makes them fit the role of "A tough on-theme creature for a cleric to conjure via greater planar ally." So while we've called Arazni Aroden's herald before... that's not exactly accurate. It's more the use of the word as nothing more than a description of something being a "messenger" or "agent" of a god, rather than a specific monster role.
As for why she was let to the wolves... that's one of the great tragic stories of the Inner Sea history. One that we may someday explore more in detail.
So are all the minor Deities in that range? If so, and this probably can't be answered due to an official lack of epic rules, what separates a powerful mortal from a lesser deity(don't know the exact term).
Well there's always Kryptonite too -- could be one of those absolute weaknesses that Tar-Baphon found and used against her.
Geb and his part I don't know about though.
I think Geb and Nex were in that power range also. That is just opinion though. Since Geb use magic on an entire country I am sure he was above 20. I also figured TB was a CR 21-22 when he fought Aroden. I have no basic for that, just speculation.
|
Creative Director
|
Pfft, James would come and usurp my point as I'm doing more research into the other heralds. :P
Ha!
yah; part of the problem is that the point at which we first called Arazni a herald of Aroden, we didn't quite have nailed down what that word actually MEANT, and as a result it's been creeping around in weird case. It'd be like us calling a spooky spellcaster a wizard even if he was actually a witch, or calling a troglodyte from "Tribe A" who has been accepted into troglodyte "Tribe B" an outsider to Tribe B.
The game steals words, in other words.
|
but it seems odd that all the other heralds re-appear next to their gods side when they die. The fact that Arazni didn't is kind of disturbing and makes you wonder what happened. Perhaps Tar-Baphon didn't just kill her, but broke her mentally? Turned her to the Dark Side for example.
Tar-Baphon was pretty big on necromancy, maybe he used an epic version of soul bind or trap the soul on her, or something.
He then held the shiny gem in his hands, and flat out *double dog dared* Aroden to come and get it.
Why did Aroden not take that dare? Did Aroden know that it was a trap? *Was* it a trap? Did Tar-Baphon have something ridonkulous up his sleeve, perhaps the same something he used to slap a wizard-goddess around like a third-grader? Or was he bluffing, and did Aroden blink, unaware that Tar-Baphon had utterly shot his wad taking down Arazni, and would have folded like a cheap suit before the might of the Last Azlanti?
What sort of secret mojo did Tar-Baphon use to defeat Arazni? Did he manage to find and bind the soul of a 'dead god' and use it as a fuel source to power some ridiculously over-the-top epic magic that he could never have managed on his own (and, joy of joys, gotten to recharge that finite supply of over-the-topness with Arazni's broken spirit?).
|
Creative Director
|
So are all the minor Deities in that range? If so, and this probably can't be answered due to an official lack of epic rules, what separates a powerful mortal from a lesser deity(don't know the exact term).
No.
Demigods, of which most minor deities (including arch devils, demon lords, the Horsemen, empyreal lords, the Eldest, the Great Old Ones, and so on) are part of the classifcation of, would be somewhere between CR 26 to CR X, with "X" in this case being 5 points higher than whatever level cap we might institute for mythic or epic rules.
Deities, the next category up from Demigod, would technically have a CR of infinity.
What separates a powerful mortal from a demigod, deity, or nascent god is the ability to grant spells to clerics. There are certainly other factors. But we don't know what they are yet since we don't have mythic rules.
Arazni was a wizard? I never knew that.
Pfft, James would come and usurp my point as I'm doing more research into the other heralds. :PHa!
yah; part of the problem is that the point at which we first called Arazni a herald of Aroden, we didn't quite have nailed down what that word actually MEANT, and as a result it's been creeping around in weird case. It'd be like us calling a spooky spellcaster a wizard even if he was actually a witch, or calling a troglodyte from "Tribe A" who has been accepted into troglodyte "Tribe B" an outsider to Tribe B.
The game steals words, in other words.
Soooo, it's all your fault then? :P
Yeah, it gets a little confusing when you compare power levels. Only reason I knew most of what I posted is I've been doing a lot of research into an epic level campaign in which Charon tries to usurp the Dead domain from Pharasma and the PCs must delve into the depths of Abadon to confront him with the aid of a weakened Pharasma. I figured she'd be dropped down to a minor-deity in power, so was looking for a basis as to where that actually was. Then of course, I look at all the other Heralds and you start thinking, "Man, Aroden's Herald could whoop all the other Herald's ass" but then Tar-Baphon toyed with her like it was nothing so he should be equal in power to that of a minor-deity. Just descends into frustration at that point.
I like rambling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What separates a powerful mortal from a demigod, deity, or nascent god is the ability to grant spells to clerics.
So all I have to do is figure out a way to infinitely cast Imbue with Spell Ability and I'm a deity?
Got it!
Eh, I would argue that the cut off between Demigod and true Deity would be CR 30 simply because that's what Achaekek is at. However, that was old 3.5 stats and you could always beef him up some if you do an Epic Level book. I imagine he would definitely be in there as his primary purpose is to stop people from stealing a gods power.
|
|
Arazni was a wizard? I never knew that.
Yeah, that was a neat tidbit. I'd gotten the impression, from her Knightly followers, that she was Iomedae 1.0, another Paladin goddess, replaced by the next, next 'hawt girlfriend of Aroden that conveniently becomes a god.'
It would be neat to see a cleric some day become an ascended god. We've got wizards and monks and paladins and fighters and rogues, but, even in the Realms, where three out of four members of an adventuring party went on to become gods, the cleric ended up getting spurned by his goddess, depowered, and then killed, while his three teammates went on to become gods.
Maybe Aroden was a cleric, 'back in the day,' to some Azlanti god(dess) that nobody remembers the name of...
What separates a powerful mortal from a demigod, deity, or nascent god is the ability to grant spells to clerics.
So all I have to do is figure out a way to infinitely cast Imbue with Spell Ability and I'm a deity?
Got it!
** spoiler omitted **
You sir, are very clever.
Can a cleric even ascend? They'd lose all their abilities once they stopped worshiping their deity. Hmmmm.
Seems to me to be the trade they take for having such awesomeness in the first 20 levels.
I'm down with that.
|
|
Can a cleric even ascend? They'd lose all their abilities once they stopped worshiping their deity. Hmmmm.
Hard to say. Iomedae seems likely to have kept her Paladin abilities even after no longer technically being a 'paladin of Aroden,' and apparently has not only not lost power, but gotten *stronger* with the death of 'her god.'
At least *some* of her powers were, at least initially, likely granted by Aroden, when she was a mortal. They got along fairly well after she ascended, so perhaps he continued to maintain them, but, IMO, it's more likely that once she became a god, she granted her own Paladin powers...
(Paradox loop! Iomedae receives powers granted by Iomedae! Illogical! Illogical!)
Behold Jeshoba! Ascended cleric, now god of feedback loops and self-referentialism!
Well, paladins are a completely different beast because they do not get their powers from a deity.
Granted, we're at the point where we try to fit game mechanics to fiction.
Hmm ascended oracle or inquistor could be interesting too. Isn't the Aeon's monad self referential?
Also if you were to stat up ragathiel he should have a smite evil ability.
|
|
Why did Aroden not take that dare? Did Aroden know that it was a trap? *Was* it a trap? Did Tar-Baphon have something ridonkulous up his sleeve, perhaps the same something he used to slap a wizard-goddess around like a third-grader? Or was he bluffing, and did Aroden blink, unaware that Tar-Baphon had utterly shot his wad taking down Arazni, and would have folded like a cheap suit before the might of the Last Azlanti?
Arazni was a wizard? I never knew that.
Yeah, that was a neat tidbit. I'd gotten the impression, from her Knightly followers, that she was Iomedae 1.0, another Paladin goddess, replaced by the next, next 'hawt girlfriend of Aroden that conveniently becomes a god.'
It would be neat to see a cleric some day become an ascended god. We've got wizards and monks and paladins and fighters and rogues, but, even in the Realms, where three out of four members of an adventuring party went on to become gods, the cleric ended up getting spurned by his goddess, depowered, and then killed, while his three teammates went on to become gods.
Maybe Aroden was a cleric, 'back in the day,' to some Azlanti god(dess) that nobody remembers the name of...
I am a bit lost with the nuances of this exchange of posts. First you affirm that Arazni was a wizard, then your later post seem to hint that you have found that information in this thread, but I don't see anyone saying that, so where you have found the information?
Maybe you are using as a source Inner Sea Magic, where under Arazni it say that now she is a "lich wizard 20+"? In the same source it say "Ex-Knight of Ozem" so I wouldn't be sure that wizard was her class in life.
Browsing the PFSRD on Templates and decided to read the Lich template. Anyway, came across this little tidbit about Arazni:
"The Harlot Queen of Geb—once Aroden’s herald Arazni, before her forced corruption by the Whispering Tyrant—is another famous lich..."
Which is from Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Undead Revisited. I like having my theories confirmed and this is another case in which stuff that comes off the top of my head fit into the Golarion world. Previous, I started Crimson Throne and made up a bunch of information about things in Korvosa and the setting, like how the Red Mantis organization worked, turns out, most of it is what's published in books.
Hmm, I think whomever is working on the psionics book is feeding stuff into my head.
Anyway, I think that largely solves my problem with Geb re-animating Arazni as a lich. If she was already corrupted by Tar-Baphon, Geb could have prepared a phylactery and whatever potions, rituals, etc. that were needed, all Arazni has to do is make the choice to become a lich or not. Now I can see why Aroden abandoned her if she turned evil.
Hmm, perhaps she didn't turn evil, she just turned neutral (if she were good) and Aroden was disappointed. Then after she realized Aroden had abandoned her, she really made the decision to become evil. Or, Aroden's lack of aid against Tar-Baphon could have been what turned her against him.
Either way, I think, in a way, Aroden is largely responsible for the creation of The Harlot Queen. I think I have a lot less respect for Aroden now.
|
|
Arazni was a wizard?I am a bit lost with the nuances of this exchange of posts. First you affirm that Arazni was a wizard, then your later post seem to hint that you have found that information in this thread, but I don't see anyone saying that, so where you have found the information?
I was lazy and didn't link to it, which I should have, since my posting something is generally an invitation to comment on my badwrongfun.
James says she was a wizard here.
So Arazni was a wizard, with an order of knighthood established around her. That's all sorts of intriguing! Was she big on tactics and military strategy and 'war magic?' Was she of royal blood, and associated with the noble class and knightly knights and whatnot? If so, to what nation?
That's all kinds of fascinating to me and great fodder for non-traditional character ideas (like 'war wizards' as parts of knightly orders or mercenary bands).
It's hard to argue that Cyric was on any team other than his own.
[tangent]In the first novels, Cyric was a better friend to Midnight than Kelemvore, and she actually went to talk with *him* when she was feeling down (usually because Kelemvore was being a dick to her, again). And then, by the last novel, also by Richard Awlinson, Cyrics entire characterization did a 180 and he was a two-dimensional cackling bad-guy. At the time, I had no idea why the characters had changed so much in personality and were unrecognizable. I heard later that they switched authors and just used the same name, for some reason, and I think that might have had something to do with the radical changes in characterization, as Cyric had been written 'too nice' for where they wanted him to end up, and Kelemvore had been profoundly unlikable, which wasn't where they wanted him to end up either... And then Cyric went on to become the god of hare-brained evil-lulz schemes that never work, or backfire on their user, making him the perfect patron god of the Zhents, I guess.[/tangent]
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting and meeting the requirements, there's a unique way that you can become a lich. That method does not require choice. If you're subjected to your personal unique path to lichdom... you become a lich if you want it or not. You probably get a saving throw... but if you fail... BANG! Liched!
It certainly doesn't happen often... but when it does, it's a noteworthy campaign event!
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting and meeting the requirements, there's a unique way that you can become a lich. That method does not require choice. If you're subjected to your personal unique path to lichdom... you become a lich if you want it or not. You probably get a saving throw... but if you fail... BANG! Liched!
It certainly doesn't happen often... but when it does, it's a noteworthy campaign event!
OOoooooh.... That certainly allows for so much potential... I know I'm going to use this information. Thank you for that very awesome idea.
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting and meeting the requirements, there's a unique way that you can become a lich. That method does not require choice. If you're subjected to your personal unique path to lichdom... you become a lich if you want it or not. You probably get a saving throw... but if you fail... BANG! Liched!
It certainly doesn't happen often... but when it does, it's a noteworthy campaign event!
Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Undead Revisited
"One does not become a lich by accident or stumble into this form of undeath through misadventure. A lich is not a puppet, a blood-mad monster, or an accident of rage or despair. The lich is instead a creature of design and ultimate will, carefully and rationally planning its transition from life into undead immortality. Of all the undead, the lich is perhaps the most terrifying precisely because it chooses its own fate..."
Carrion Crown was released from February to July of 2011 and UR was released in June or 2011. I believe the SOP is anything released in later publications over-rules previously published material. However this is a little murky ground because they were, essentially, released at the exact same time. I'm not sure which part of the AP the accidental lichdom is in, but if it's in the first 4, then UR would over-rule it and that scenario would then be one of those 1 in 10 billion chances things. If it's in the 5th book, then they have the same release, but if it's the 6th book, then it over-rules UR.
So which one is correct? Your post seems to imply that even if someone doesn't want to become a lich, they could accidentally (or forcefully) do so, while UR specifically says the only way to become a lich is through your own choice.
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting and meeting the requirements, there's a unique way that you can become a lich. That method does not require choice. If you're subjected to your personal unique path to lichdom... you become a lich if you want it or not. You probably get a saving throw... but if you fail... BANG! Liched!
It certainly doesn't happen often... but when it does, it's a noteworthy campaign event!
Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Undead Revisited
"One does not become a lich by accident or stumble into this form of undeath through misadventure. A lich is not a puppet, a blood-mad monster, or an accident of rage or despair. The lich is instead a creature of design and ultimate will, carefully and rationally planning its transition from life into undead immortality. Of all the undead, the lich is perhaps the most terrifying precisely because it chooses its own fate..."
Carrion Crown was released from February to July of 2011 and UR was released in June or 2011. I believe the SOP is anything released in later publications over-rules previously published material. However this is a little murky ground because they were, essentially, released at the exact same time. I'm not sure which part of the AP the accidental lichdom is in, but if it's in the first 4, then UR would over-rule it and that scenario would then be one of those 1 in 10 billion chances things. If it's in the 5th book, then they have the same release, but if it's the 6th book, then it over-rules UR.
So which one is correct? Your post seems to imply that even if someone doesn't want to become a lich, they could accidentally (or forcefully) do so, while UR specifically says the only way to become a lich is through your own choice.
I think that fluff part of Lich refers to the most common (but not the only) cause of lichdom - i.e. necromantic studies that lead to creation of highly personalized ritual that turns the character into lich. In the similar manner, except much-much harder (but mitigated a bit by cooperation on the subject's side), the ritual could probably by designed for another person but would require extensive knowledge of that person.
D&D stories about liches also involved a number of accidental liches, where casters became liches due to magical mishaps, but as far as I recall they all involved accidents during the experimentation and magical procedures by the affected ones, so in general accidental liches had only themselves to blame for involving themselves with dangerous magic.
I don't see a contradiction -- if someone else makes you a lich they did it as part of a careful rational plan with the lich as the creature of design and will.
Just because the person that becomes the lich didn't do that designing and planning doesn't mean it wasn't done.
But I would think such a thing would be even rarer than a 'normal' lich.
There was a whole D&D campaign setting where the lich king turns on his doomsday device and turns everyone in the city into undead. All wizards in the city automatically become liches regardless of level or alignment, and what's more, they all retain their original alignment. Some are not terribly pleased with the situation, but it beats turning into a zombie or shadow like most of the folk in the city.
Which is a roundabout way of saying that lichifying an unwilling subject has ample precedent in the game.
My only qualm is with liches being automatically evil. My preference is for a good number of them being evil, including many famous ones, but the majority are not so much evil as "You young whippersnappers! You stay off my lawn!" cranky, with whatever they consider their "lawn" varying from lich to lich.
Imagine building your tomb out in some nice secluded spot out in the wilderness only to have some empire expand and someone builds some tawdry brothel over your head. You'd be cranky too.
There was a whole D&D campaign setting where the lich king turns on his doomsday device and turns everyone in the city into undead. All wizards in the city automatically become liches regardless of level or alignment, and what's more, they all retain their original alignment. Some are not terribly pleased with the situation, but it beats turning into a zombie or shadow like most of the folk in the city.
Wasn't that Raveloft adventure? It would match certain myths about the all the denizens of Darkonese capital being turned into Undeads because of Azalin Rex experiments.
My only qualm is with liches being automatically evil. My preference is for a good number of them being evil, including many famous ones, but the majority are not so much evil as "You young whippersnappers! You stay off my lawn!" cranky, with whatever they consider their "lawn" varying from lich to lich.
There is problem of often presented Undeads are always evil trope. Personally I think that great majority of willing Undeads are evil because they are driven by extreme selfishness and egocentrism, that kind which makes them sacrifice others (metaphorically and literaly) for personal purposes.
Imagine building your tomb out in some nice secluded spot out in the wilderness only to have some empire expand and someone builds some tawdry brothel over your head. You'd be cranky too.
'
So true. So much true taking into account that after thousand years or so you stopped thinking of that gruesome, noisy, slimy and generally grotesque reproduction method. Either that or you miss it so much.
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting...Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Undead Revisited
"One does not become a lich by accident or stumble into this form of undeath through misadventure. A lich is not a puppet, a blood-mad monster...
I think that fluff part of Lich refers to the most common (but not the only) cause of lichdom - i.e. necromantic studies that lead to creation of highly personalized ritual that turns the character into lich. In the similar manner, except much-much harder (but mitigated a bit by cooperation on the subject's side), the ritual could probably by designed for another person but would require extensive knowledge of that person.
D&D stories about liches also involved a number of accidental liches, where casters became liches due to magical mishaps, but as far as I recall they all involved accidents during the experimentation and magical procedures by the affected ones, so in general accidental liches had only themselves to blame for involving themselves with dangerous magic.
The adapted ritual you mentioned had cooperation, which would be a willing choice which is different than forcing an unwilling person to become a lich.
The stories, if you're talking about books and not modules or playable adventures, are never designed to fit into the game mechanics. However, if there were a magical accident that resulted in a lich, I would imagine he would have had to made the choice to resist death and became a lich. Kind of like a spontaneous transplantation of their soul.
I don't see a contradiction -- if someone else makes you a lich they did it as part of a careful rational plan with the lich as the creature of design and will.
Just because the person that becomes the lich didn't do that designing and planning doesn't mean it wasn't done.
But I would think such a thing would be even rarer than a 'normal' lich.
I disagree. The lich is supposed to choose its own fate. No one else can force the caster to become a lich, just like no matter how powerful you are, you cannot force someone to return to life if they choose not to.
There was a whole D&D campaign setting where the lich king turns on his doomsday device and turns everyone in the city into undead. All wizards in the city automatically become liches regardless of level or alignment, and what's more, they all retain their original alignment. Some are not terribly pleased with the situation, but it beats turning into a zombie or shadow like most of the folk in the city.
Which is a roundabout way of saying that lichifying an unwilling subject has ample precedent in the game.
Ravenloft is a setting that is inherently dark and things that normally work elsewhere, don't work there. Forcefully turning people into liches in Ravenloft is one thing, doing it in Golarion (or other settings) is different as it's a different campaign setting. Which is one of the issues, as this is Pathfinder/Golarion and depending on which book is the later publication, and therefore the superseding publication, in Pathfinder/Golarion, you only become a lich if you choose to become one.
It seems I'm the only one who disagrees on this so I'm just going to leave it here. I just do NOT agree with the idea that some external force can fundamentally alter you soul without your choice. Not a will save, but your willing consent. Gods can't do it, so neither can mortals.
Actually there have been plenty of stories of people forced into lichdom in past incarnations of D&D -- everywhere from Darksun to Forgotten Realms has had something like it happen and even greyhawk if I remember correctly.
As to 'fundamentally alter your soul' what do you think the Daemons do that eat souls? The final blades that hold souls supposedly forever? Soul Trap? Undead that make it almost (if not completely) impossible for you to return because they devour and destroy your soul?
|
Actually there have been plenty of stories of people forced into lichdom in past incarnations of D&D -- everywhere from Darksun to Forgotten Realms has had something like it happen and even greyhawk if I remember correctly.
As to 'fundamentally alter your soul' what do you think the Daemons do that eat souls? The final blades that hold souls supposedly forever? Soul Trap? Undead that make it almost (if not completely) impossible for you to return because they devour and destroy your soul?
And undead spawning methods, the way bodaks originate from people dying in the Abyss, helms of opposite alignment, deck of many things, getting turned into a meenlock, getting turned into an Ooze Creature from Advanced Bestiary, Balor Lords' ability to swallow someone's soul and poop them out as demons and all the other various ways fiends are able to twist innocent souls into more of their kind, whatever happened to the god Zon-Kuthon...
Getting turned undead while being able to retain your personality and alignment is downright benign in comparison to some of the nastier things going on throughout the history of the game.
|
|
One of the interesting things about liches (and this is part of the plot of Carrion Crown, in fact) is that for each person who's capable of spellcasting and meeting the requirements, there's a unique way that you can become a lich. That method does not require choice. If you're subjected to your personal unique path to lichdom... you become a lich if you want it or not. You probably get a saving throw... but if you fail... BANG! Liched!
It certainly doesn't happen often... but when it does, it's a noteworthy campaign event!
Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Undead Revisited
"One does not become a lich by accident or stumble into this form of undeath through misadventure. A lich is not a puppet, a blood-mad monster, or an accident of rage or despair. The lich is instead a creature of design and ultimate will, carefully and rationally planning its transition from life into undead immortality. Of all the undead, the lich is perhaps the most terrifying precisely because it chooses its own fate..."
Carrion Crown was released from February to July of 2011 and UR was released in June or 2011. I believe the SOP is anything released in later publications over-rules previously published material. However this is a little murky ground because they were, essentially, released at the exact same time. I'm not sure which part of the AP the accidental lichdom is in, but if it's in the first 4, then UR would over-rule it and that scenario would then be one of those 1 in 10 billion chances things. If it's in the 5th book, then they have the same release, but if it's the 6th book, then it over-rules UR.
So which one is correct? Your post seems to imply that even if someone doesn't want to become a lich, they could accidentally (or forcefully) do so, while UR specifically says the only way to become a lich is through your own choice.
Actually both accounts are correct
Carrion Crown spoilers
|
|
It seems I'm the only one who disagrees on this so I'm just going to leave it here. I just do NOT agree with the idea that some external force can fundamentally alter you soul without your choice. Not a will save, but your willing consent. Gods can't do it, so neither can mortals.
What being turned into a spectre, wraith, vampire and countless other undead that reproduce killing other creatures and making them one of their kind will do if not "fundamentally alter you soul without your choice"?
In my world lore a soul can never be permanently destroyed and there is always a chance of recovery, but it can be grievously harmed.
Getting turned undead while being able to retain your personality and alignment is downright benign in comparison to some of the nastier things going on throughout the history of the game.
Very well put. Mikaze.
|
|
Adding to the list of 'lich but I didn't wanna be', one of the ruling necromancers of Hollowfaust, in the Scarred Lands setting, was an apprentice who was summarily killed and brought back as a lich by one of the original rulers, who was attempting research into means of becoming immortal, by killing off his unlucky apprentices with various experiments. (And, indeed, considered the apprentice turning into a lich, instead of becoming immortal, to be a failure. He already knew how to turn into a lich. He wanted to be immortal and alive!)
It seems I'm the only one who disagrees on this so I'm just going to leave it here. I just do NOT agree with the idea that some external force can fundamentally alter you soul without your choice. Not a will save, but your willing consent. Gods can't do it, so neither can mortals.
The setting assumption appears to be that noncorporeal undead are indeed bodiless souls, twisted into a new morality, type, etc.
(Amusingly, they also lose or gain attributes, and HD, during this transformation, making the Int 18, Cha 8 12th level wizard slain by a shadow drop to Int 6 (and 3 HD), but become vastly more personable and charming, with a Cha of 15, and the Int 8 paladin made into a wraith rise to Int 14, despite being assumed to be the same soul!)
Ghosts are the only one that retain their original alignment (and mental attributes), so the ghost of a paladin who died having failed to deliver a healing relic to a community beset by plague and lingered due to frustration over their 'failure' in the hopes of finding a way to convince someone who discovers their body to carry on their mission, can remain lawful good, at least, for awhile, and possibly even continue using their paladin abilities, if they didn't worship a god who specifically loathes undead (such as Sarenrae), like Abadar or Torag or Erastil or Shelyn.
But if a paladin is killed by a shadow? One round later, he's chaotic evil, and if that shadow is destroyed six seconds after that, he's a shiny new CE soul, probably bound for the Abyss and wondering why Iomedae no longer returns his calls. [Adventure hook! Your paladin buddy just got ganked by a spectre, and you positive energy channeled his incorporeal butt into ectoplasmic residue, but now you have to travel to the Boneyard and find his soul in Pharasma's line, and cast atonement on him for his 'unintentional evil' so that he can go to his deserved afterlife, and not become demon-fodder!]
Them's the breaks.
I'd prefer an Egyptian style 'multiple soul fragments' sort of situation where everyone has a 'shadow soul' or khaibit, that lingers behind in their body, and is what one speaks to with a speak with dead spell, or what gets twisted into the various spawned undead.
Then again, unrestricted use of the spawning ability of undead has often been a pain anyway, for various reasons. With ghouls and vampires, it at least takes some time, and the creatures have reasons to *not* procreate willy nilly, but for incorporeal undead, the sky's the limit.
Changing Create Spawn to being something that *can* happen and not something that *always* happens (at the GM's discretion, saving it for when it's narratively important, and putting out of the reach of any slob who manages to Command a shadow, to create an endless army of TANSTAAFL-defying perpetual death machinery), would be one way of negating the 'wight-o-calypse' scenario, where a single undead goes on a killing spree in a village full of commoners who can't even hurt it, and as the days go by, spread in all directions, until 10,000 shadows come swooping into city after city, adding to their numbers...
I'm going to throw my two cents in. I'm not too keen on this. The whole history of the lich has been one of a spellcaster choosing to become one, finding out that to do so they have to create a phylactery, craft a potion, drink it, and then bam, if they make the throw, they die and resurrect as a lich.
As far as all the other examples of undead creating more of their kind against the will of the victim, sure, that's the way those undead have always 'reproduced'. There's no 'process' to that. The undead attack the victim, the victim dies, and they become undead. A lich doesn't create another lich just by killing somebody.
Having somebody become a lich because they were forced into it just...I dunno. It just doesn't fit with me. You're telling me some other wizard/cleric/sorcerer took the time to make a phylactery for Azrani, crafted the potion, and forced her to drink it? How? Poured it down her throat while holding her down?
::sigh::
I gotta say, the more fluff that comes out for Pathfinder Chronicles the less I'm liking the setting.
|
|
In my world lore a soul can never be permanently destroyed and there is always a chance of recovery, but it can be grievously harmed.
Huh!
Spoilered for my players:
It's a secret fact of the universe that even many gods don't know. Just felt more interesting that way.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So which one is correct? Your post seems to imply that even if someone doesn't want to become a lich, they could accidentally (or forcefully) do so, while UR specifically says the only way to become a lich is through your own choice.
Both versions are correct.
Note that I did not say you could "accidentally" become a lich, really, in my original post. The circumstances for each person's lich apotheosis are complex and unique enough that an "accidental" transformation would never happen (and by "would never," I'm actually saying "so statistically improbable that it's essentially not possible").
I was talking about someone being transformed into a lich against their will, which is a far cry from an accidental transformation. In this case, the "design and ultimate will" and "careful and rational plans" are just not those of the person being transformed into a lich. The proceedure, in any case, turns the victim evil and makes them bad guys, as surely as a good guy putting on a helm of opposite alignment turns bad.
So... both remain correct.
And standard operating procedure is basically "the Inner Sea World Guide" is correct, even if something comes out later that contradicts the ISWG. A contradiction like that is just an error.
But again... in this case, there's no contradiction.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having somebody become a lich because they were forced into it just...I dunno. It just doesn't fit with me. You're telling me some other wizard/cleric/sorcerer took the time to make a phylactery for Azrani, crafted the potion, and forced her to drink it? How? Poured it down her throat while holding her down?
No... in fact, I haven't revealed exactly how Geb managed to turn a dead nascent deity into an undead lich, but it was not simply a matter of making Arazni a phylactery and pouring a potion down her throat while holding her down. The method by which he accomplished this has not been revealed in print, and is not known by pretty much anyone in world either save for Geb, Arazni, and a few others who are VERY GOOD at keeping secrets.
It's more or less happened once in the history of Golarion—and that event was SIGNIFICANT enough that it's pretty famous.
Carrion Crown...
In pretty much all other cases, liches ARE the result of evil spellcasters who want to become liches themselves. Just because there are two pretty high profile examples of the "forced lichdom" doesn't mean that it happens much at all... or in fact, has EVER happened more than once in the history of the Inner Sea or Golarion.
What I'm saying is that we've pretty much done what we wanted to do with this idea being successful with the character of Arazni, and what we've wanted to do with the idea as an adventure element in Carrion Crown, and having done that, are unlikely to tread this ground again in print.