[3.5] A Question About Liches

[Theodoriph]

I have a quick question to all those who know the rules better than I.


If you:

1. Grow a clone
2. Become a lich
3. Destroy your phylactery

Would your lifeforce then transfer into your clone?

Would you then be able to rinse and repeat creating a small contingent of liches in your quest for some evil goal (Small because your clone would be one level lower each time and eventually you wouldn't meet the pre-reqs for becoming a lich)?


P.S. If lifeforce does not equal one's soul, then you wouldn't need to detroy the phylactery. But would your lich "drop dead" as a result of it's soul entering the clone? Has WoTC ever rules on that?

[shadzar]

:smalleek: Are there clones in 3.5?

[Theodoriph]

Yeah. It's an 8th level Sorceror/Wizard spell.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm

[Fan]

Yes. Yes there are. Also I warn against this... This is on the "Make Simulcra of yourself to craft things.", or "Presisted Body out side body for free magic items" level of chesse.

[arguskos]

Here's the issue: just destroying your phylactery doesn't actually DO anything. Now, if you do that and then somehow die, yes, your live probably goes into your clone, granting you new life. Of course, this doesn't let you make a whole bunch of yourselves.

[shadzar]

OK so it is a spell. well then I think it conflicts with becoming a lich.


If the original individual has been slain, its soul immediately transfers to the clone, creating a replacement (provided that the soul is free and willing to return).

Here the clone would be trying to claim the soul while the phylactery does as well. So which has priority to claim the soul?

Because you have to die to become a lich.

I would say it to not be possible for this fact.

[Theodoriph]

Here's the issue: just destroying your phylactery doesn't actually DO anything. Now, if you do that and then somehow die, yes, your live probably goes into your clone, granting you new life. Of course, this doesn't let you make a whole bunch of yourselves.


A Lich stores their "life force" in their phylactery. It's a receptacle. A lich can only make one, and once it's destroyed, too bad (according to Libris Mortis). Thus if the term "lifeforce" includes one's soul, then upon the destruction of the phylactery, the soul could conceivably travel into the clone.


If "life force" does not include one's soul, then there is no need to destroy the phylactery. Of course that wouldn't make much sense with regards to flavour...since if the phylactery didn't contain their soul, their body would, and when you destroyed their body, you'd be releasing their soul.

(Actually upon further reflection, the phylactery has to contain the soul. If it didn't though, it might be possible to create a number of soulless liches (Lich Golems?) by committing suicide and releasing your soul to the clone. Then your phylactery would bring you back. So I'm pretty sure the phylactery holds the soul.)

[Theodoriph]

OK so it is a spell. well then I think it conflicts with becoming a lich.



Here the clone would be trying to claim the soul while the phylactery does as well. So which has priority to claim the soul?

Because you have to die to become a lich.

I would say it to not be possible for this fact.


That's why I suggested destroying the phylactery. That would release the soul to be claimed by the clone when the clone is ready (if the phylactery holds the soul).

[shadzar]

That's why I suggested destroying the phylactery. That would release the soul to be claimed by the clone when the clone is ready.

:smallconfused:

You said make a clone THEN become a lich. That just doesn't seem to work as there is not a soul to come back because the soul has yet to leave this plane so the phylactery and clone would be fighting over the soul when you die to become a lich.

it never made it to the phylactery yet, and if you destroy the phylactery, then you just become a cloned version of yourself, without any benefits of lichdom, because you never became a lich.

If you made a clone after becoming a lich, the you would have a new skeletal body maybe ready prior to the required 10-day waiting period for growing a new one from your phylactery.

If the phylactery would release the soul to the cloned body rather than the one it itself creates for you.

:smallconfused: A true conundrum.

[Theodoriph]

If you destroy the phylactery, the lich is still around. :smallsmile: Liches aren't destroyed when their phylacteries are. They are destroyed when their bodies + their phylacteries are destroyed.

So if you destroyed the phylactery, the soul would be available to the clone...and the lich would still exist (although it could be destroyed simply by destroying its body since it does not have a phylactery anymore).




This whole intermingling of souls, undead and clones is what's confusing me =D

That being said, since I'm the DM and I like the idea, I'll just allow my Lich villain to do so, but I'd prefer if it were legal by RAW, which is why I'm asking. =D That way if my player's complain, I don't have to cite DM fiat.

[kamikasei]

Couldn't you cut off your finger, regenerate it, become a lich, make a clone from the finger, and have a clone of your original living body ready as a backup while being a lich yourself (phew!)?

Re: phylacteries, "life forces" and souls: it's conceivable that the life-force is something distinct from the soul, something more bound to the body. Say that the phylactery contains the life force, while the lich's body contains the soul; when the lich is destroyed, the life force causes a new body to generate to house the temporarily free-floating soul. In this scenario, you could say that the clone spell actually duplicates the life-force but not the soul, resulting in two bodies of which only one is occupied.

Just a thought. Point is that you can construct reasoning to allow a bunch of different outcomes if you want them, although none will be "official" or binding.

edit: Personally I'd be inclined to say you can't copy a soul. So if your view is that the phlactery contains the soul, it's somehow controlling the body remotely; so if the phylactery is destroyed and the soul migrates into a clone, either:
a) the soul becomes properly bound to its new body, and the lich body crumbles; or
b) the soul can switch between bodies, but only control one at a time (an intriguing possibility!)

Interesting notion: proceed as above - take flesh sample, heal wound, become lich, create clone. Now, do something to the clone to make it a phylactery or proto-phylactery (a phylactery just waiting for the soul to be transferred to it). Smash your phylactery.

Now you have a lich body which can be regenerated ad infinitum with your living body acting as its phylactery, but can switch back to your living body when necessary. When not in use you can keep your living body in a pool of quintessence or something. Best of both worlds! Good luck working out your stat adjustments.

[arguskos]

In that case, it still doesn't work. The phylactery, having come after the clone was made, gets priority.

Why why why WHY do people continue on trying to pull stupid crap like this? These sort of abuses are why DMs get restrictive. Please, think of the DM's.

[Yuki Akuma]

Couldn't you cut off your finger, regenerate it, become a lich, make a clone from the finger, and have a clone of your original living body ready as a backup while being a lich yourself (phew!)?

Re: phylacteries, "life forces" and souls: it's conceivable that the life-force is something distinct from the soul, something more bound to the body. Say that the phylactery contains the life force, while the lich's body contains the soul; when the lich is destroyed, the life force causes a new body to generate to house the temporarily free-floating soul. In this scenario, you could say that the clone spell actually duplicates the life-force but not the soul, resulting in two bodies of which only one is occupied.

Just a thought. Point is that you can construct reasoning to allow a bunch of different outcomes if you want them, although none will be "official" or binding.

That doesn't really work - souls are made of positive energy. Which is also 'life force'. Liches put their positive energy souls into a magic item and then infuse themselves with negative energy to fill up the gap left.

(Most intelligent undead lose their soul and get a new, negative energy version. Liches just stuff their soul somewhere else.)

[shadzar]

If you destroy the phylactery, the lich is still around. :smallsmile: Liches aren't destroyed when their phylacteries are. They are destroyed when their bodies + their phylacteries are destroyed.

So if you destroyed the phylactery, the soul would be available to the clone...and the lich would still exist (although it could be destroyed simply by destroying its body since it does not have a phylactery anymore).




This whole intermingling of souls, undead and clones is what's confusing me =D

That being said, since I'm the DM and I like the idea, I'll just allow my Lich villain to do so, but I'd prefer if it were legal by RAW, which is why I'm asking. =D That way if my player's complain, I don't have to cite DM fiat.

:smallconfused: huh? The soul must entire the phylactery BEFORE becoming a lich after the bodies dies the first time.

During this time you CAN destroy the phylactery and kill the lich when it is most vulnerable and unable to do anything at all to defend itself.

So again it wasn't in the phylactery long enough to become a lich, if you turn around and destroy the phylactery prior to becoming a lich just to have the soul bounce to a cloned body.

You gain nothing, except the expenses for making the phylactery that you had someone else destroy.

[Yuki Akuma]

:smallconfused: huh? The soul must entire the phylactery BEFORE becoming a lich after the bodies dies the first time.

Maybe in earlier editions, I really have no clue, but in 3.5 it's very vague and could easily go either way.

[kamikasei]

souls are made of positive energy

Don't think I've heard that claim before. What's it based on?

[arguskos]

Don't think I've heard that claim before. What's it based on?
Best thing I've got is the 3.X module Bastion of Broken Souls, which claims that souls are created in a "fountain" that resides on the Positive Energy Plane. This would lead one to assume that they are made of positive energy or something.

[Yuki Akuma]

Don't think I've heard that claim before. What's it based on?

Several books. The only one I can think of right now is Magic of Incarnum, but I know there are more.

It's the explanation for why cure spells heal the living (they have normal souls) but hurt the undead (they have 'negative' souls).

(Don't ask me why cure spells also work on most constructs, I really have no clue.)

[Theodoriph]

:smallconfused: huh? The soul must entire the phylactery BEFORE becoming a lich after the bodies dies the first time.

During this time you CAN destroy the phylactery and kill the lich when it is most vulnerable and unable to do anything at all to defend itself.

So again it wasn't in the phylactery long enough to become a lich, if you turn around and destroy the phylactery prior to becoming a lich just to have the soul bounce to a cloned body.

You gain nothing, except the expenses for making the phylactery that you had someone else destroy.



You clone yourself before becoming a lich. You destroy the phylactery after (not before) becoming a lich (you survive the destroying your phylactery since to destroy yourself, you'd need to destroy your body and your phylactery, but you've only destroyed your phylactery). That would theoretically release your soul from the phylactery, making it available for the clone. It would also make you vulnerable to being destroyed, but that's worth having a you-2 wandering around.


Although if what Yuki says is accurate and it's never really spelled out, that would allow me to do it. =D Ambiguities are my friend.

[Yuki Akuma]

You clone yourself before becoming a lich. You destroy the phylactery after (not before) becoming a lich (you survive the destroying your phylactery since to destroy yourself, you'd need to destroy your body and your phylactery, but you've only destroyed your phylactery). That would theoretically release your soul from the phylactery, making it available for the clone. It would also make you vulnerable to being destroyed, but that's worth having a you-2 wandering around.


Although if what Yuki says is accurate and it's never really spelled out, that would allow me to do it. =D Ambiguities are my friend.

Now have the clone cast clone and become a lich, destroy his new phylactery, and so on...

Expensive, but!

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

1. Cast Animate Object on your phylactery.
2. Create a Clone of your phylactery.
3. When your phylactery is destroyed, your soul goes into its clone.

[kamikasei]

We seem to be fast approaching the point where the lack of definition in D&D as to what a soul is, what it can do, and what can be done to it, starts to be a problem.

Is a soul a person's mind and memories and personality, or just some "spark" separate from those that makes them alive? In this case it makes sense to say that an intelligent undead has removed their original soul and replaced it with a negative-energy version that does the same job, and yet retain their identities - but it doesn't explain how dead souls go to the afterlife, apparently taking their identities with them, or why you have to restore a person's soul to their body in order to resurrect them, rather than just grabbing any random soul and grafting it in.

My preference would be to see the notion of the "soul" in D&D broken up into sub-souls - say, a body-soul and a spiritual soul - so that effects which seem to treat souls in different ways could be explained as working on different souls.

Without some such scheme we're left with no real guide on whether a lich has a soul or not, whether its soul resides in its phylactery or not, whether the lich would still exist if its soul was in another body, etc.

[Yuki Akuma]

The assumption seems to be that the soul has all of your memories, but so does your brain. Which is how speak with dead works, incidentally.

There's also a prestige class for illithids that let them absorb memories by eating brains, but the owner of the brain can still be resurrected (but not raised, 'cause his brain is missing) without needing a wish.

The soul's memories and personality probably take precedence, though, which is why soul jar works.

With the lich's "negative energy soul", I'd assume it would absorb the memories from the brain so that when the brain rots the lich doesn't care.

[hamishspence]

Complete Divine went into the subject of souls in some depth- and said some undead, like liches and mummies, trap the soul of the formerly living creature in their undead body. Implying the creature does indeed have a soul- the exact same one.

[Yuki Akuma]

Complete Divine went into the subject of souls in some depth- and said some undead, like liches and mummies, trap the soul of the formerly living creature in their undead body. Implying the creature does indeed have a soul- the exact same one.

Of course a lich has the same soul - it's stuffed in a box in a safe deposit box. The thing in his body is something else entirely.

[hamishspence]

Doesn't say that in 3.5 lich description, nor in Complete Divine. And Libris Mortis suggests that its the "life force" thats in the phylactery.

I think its closer to OoTS- the sentient soul is within the lich- it only jumps to the phylactery when the lich is slain.

[kamikasei]

Sounds like CD/LM is thinking along the same lines as me - the lich retains his soul, but his "animus" is stored in his phylactery, and a negative energy substitute runs his body. When the soul becomes unhoused, it prompts the animus to generate it a new vessel.

[Optimystik]

Best thing I've got is the 3.X module Bastion of Broken Souls, which claims that souls are created in a "fountain" that resides on the Positive Energy Plane. This would lead one to assume that they are made of positive energy or something.

BoED says it too: "While undead draw their energy from the Negative energy plane, deathless are strongly tied to the Positive Energy plane, the birthplace of all souls." (pg. 157, "The Deathless")


Sounds like CD/LM is thinking along the same lines as me - the lich retains his soul, but his "animus" is stored in his phylactery, and a negative energy substitute runs his body. When the soul becomes unhoused, it prompts the animus to generate it a new vessel.

Gotta love divisible souls... (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DreamMirror) :smallwink:

[shadow_archmagi]

No, this is the correct way to do it:

1. Make clone.
2. Become Lich.
3. Enjoy life.
4. The inevitable happens and somehow your soulbox is destroyed.
5. Kill self.
6. Soul and life-force enter clone. It's a brand new you!
7. Repeat steps 1 through 6 as needed.

It's a whole extra layer of insurance policy for the paranoid lich.

[shadzar]

How do you keep the clone alive that long? Doesn't it still need to eat? Without a soul is it even capable of locomotion to chew or drink?

[Yuki Akuma]

As per the Clone spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm), the clone is just inert flesh until it has a soul in it. So you could keep it in some sort of stasis, like with a Gentle Repose (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/gentleRepose.htm) spell.

It's not an actual clone in the scientific way.

[shadzar]

So preserved as in strawberry preserves, not kept fed and cleaned and such like someone who is brain dead?

[Yuki Akuma]

Yeah it's not actually alive without a soul - it's basically a corpse. You could probably even cast animate dead on it if you wanted.

[Zhalath]

Wait, can't a lich just regenerate his or her body when it's destroyed, but the phylactery isn't? What would the point of being a clone be then? This is starting to sound like Expanded Universe Palpatine's plan.

[Quietus]

Wait, can't a lich just regenerate his or her body when it's destroyed, but the phylactery isn't? What would the point of being a clone be then? This is starting to sound like Expanded Universe Palpatine's plan.

The clone is for when the phylactery is destroyed. Essentially it would go :

Lich has soul -> Lich dies, soul goes into phylactery, grows new body -> New lich created -> Phylactery destroyed -> Lich destroyed -> Lich's soul tries to go into phylactery, no phylactery to enter, defaults to next valid target, which is the clone.

They'd end up alive again, at the same level of physical fitness they were at when they became a Lich. Assuming they were kept preserved via Gentle Repose, of course.