PDA

View Full Version : metagame mayhem.



Draig
2012-02-01, 02:44 PM
Its me again playground, this time I'm having a little trouble with every DM's nemesis. Metagaming.

The example from my campaign is that the party found a bunch of loot, one of the items was a silver flask with gold runes on it. The party appraised it and divided the loot accordingly. Well the player with the flask did not realize he was now holding the phylactery of a very powerful Lich Lord. That night when he was in his room he was visited by the lich who has (edit) coerced the PC into being his minion. the pc loves the RP aspect of it BUT the problem now is that the warlock in the party is now trying to steal the flask. Only the minion PC knows what it is but now a few players are trying to destroy it or obtain it, when I asked why they said because they are just being curious. As a DM I believe this to be a pure metagame move on their part.

My questions are, A) is this in fact metagaming in your opinion. And B) if it is metagaming what penalties or ways would you use to handle it?

INoKnowNames
2012-02-01, 03:03 PM
Its me again playground, this time I'm having a little trouble with every DM's nemesis. Metagaming.

The example from my campaign is that the party found a bunch of loot, one of the items was a silver flask with gold runes on it. The party appraised it and divided the loot accordingly. Well the player with the flask did not realize he was now holding the phylactery of a very powerful Lich Lord. That night when he was in his room he was visited by the lich who is coerced the PC into being his minion. the pc loves the RP aspect of it BUT the problem now is that the warlock in the party is now trying to steal the flask. Only the minion PC knows what it is but now a few players are trying to destroy it or obtain it, when I asked why they said because they are just being curious. As a DM I believe this to be a pure metagame move on their part.

My questions are, A) is this in fact metagaming in your opinion. And B) if it is metagaming what penalties or ways would you use to handle it?

I'm very very green, so there's a good chance I have absolutely no idea what I'm saying.

But let me get this straight. One of your players now have a "Powerful Lich Lord" as his personal slave. And the other characters want to steal the Leesh of the Lich so they can control it.

You say that the players aren't aware of what the cup does, but now want to take it. Were they aware of the Lich's contact with the first player? Because if so, it certainly seems realistic that someone would make the connection "Timmy has Green and Pink Talking Balloons with Crowns. Timmy suddenly recieves every wish he wants. Green and Pink Talking Balloons give Timmy Wishes" "Player Recieves Weird Cup. Lich obeys Player. Weird Cup Controls Lich."

I feel like context is missing from the situation. If they don't know about the Lich's initial meeting with the player; that it was completely seperate from them, then there is room to consider them metagaming. But if he suddenly shows up in the middle of the group's campsite and swears his alleigance to the player with the cup, then I honestly wouldn't be blaming them myself. Even in the first case, depending on how much they know about the Lich, it wouldn't be as big a jump of character as you might expect for them to put two-and-two together.

It's hard to give out nice gifts and keep all the kids in line....

skycycle blues
2012-02-01, 03:13 PM
I agree. The level of metagaming depends on how much in-game information the rest of the party has. If the players can make a compelling argument (even if it isn't completely coherent or hold together) for why their characters would want the flask based on in game knowledge plus maybe some Knowledge/Gather Information/Intelligence or Wisdom/whatever other kind of skill might be applicable checks, and a little bit of allowed metagaming (because you can't completely disallow it unless players don't know the game very well), then I think it's fair to let them try to go for the flask.

My basic strategy to eliminate metagame based decisions is just to ask "Why are you doing that?" and if the answer isn't satisfactory, I don't allow the action, or I help to make the answer into something that makes sense.

If the player with the flask has been acting strangely since they took hold of it, curiosity seems like a fair motive to try to get at it. But again, it depends on all the in game information that you've given them access to.

Z3ro
2012-02-01, 03:15 PM
Sadly, there's not much you can do to mitigate metagaming once its reached that level. You have two choices with which to deal with metagaming:

1. Keep information segragated. This works well provided your players don't mind going to the other room for a while or passing notes. Then the other players have no idea there's a lich in the flask and don't try to steal it. Unfortunately, few people are willing to work this way, because they like knowing.

2. Agree not to metagame ahead of time. This is the best method, but tricky, as many people have good intentions but don't always adhere to them. Then if they do metagame, you can call them out on it and hopefully they learn from it.

If neither of those two methods work, all you can do is to not present situations that require seperate player knowledge:smallannoyed:.

Dimers
2012-02-01, 03:18 PM
My questions are, A) is this in fact metagaming in your opinion. And B) if it is metagaming what penalties or ways would you use to handle it?

(A) Probably. No way I could tell for sure, though.

(B) Liches (being the brilliant and magically-apt creatures they are) tend to work seventeen steps ahead of normal people. In this case, the phylactery is actually a gold coin from the same treasure horde which that PC also got as part of his share, and the lich is only pretending the flask has anything to do with it. It's all part of the Cunning Plan (TM). So let somebody steal the flask, with appropriately high difficulty, and find out over time that it doesn't change anything. If you want to really confuse the other PCs, put on a big dramatic show when they succeed in destroying the flask ... it's just one more layer of protection for the lich.

bloodtide
2012-02-01, 03:28 PM
This sounds like normal everyday metagaming.

You set up one player to get a cool item that would be a "Haha, secret that you know but can't act on, in your face" type thing for the rest of the group. So one player got something special, everyone else got nothing, and you expected everyone to just sit back(and put on their ''Joe got a lich lord buddy and all I got was this lousy t-shirt'').

So first of all, you need to know your group. If they are the type that can't resist metagaming, then you can't tell them things to bait them. Some people just can't help but meatgame. You can't say to them, ''oh the ring of power is in the third chest...but..um..your character does not know what'', because they will then ''randomly'' open chest three first. A lot of this comes from treating D&D as 'just a game' like Risk. For the most part, you can't tell the players all the game rules, information and secrets...and then just ask them to play along and pretend they don't know.

Second....did you really taunt the players? Did you have all the players at the table sit quietly and watch while Player Joe had his own personal lich encounter? That is almost always a bad idea, unless you have an agreeable group. Even so it's still a great idea to do the 'Joe meets the Lich' outside the normal game, so no other player sees it.

Third...well your just in the hole now. All the players 'know' about the item and want to take actions. The only thing you can say is no. You might even need to stop the game, sit everyone down, and explain ''metagaming and player/character knowledge''. Of course the players may not like it. At worst you can just say 'the item is gone' and get back to the game.

Dr. Yes
2012-02-01, 03:31 PM
Your players probably are metagaming, but there are plenty of possible in-game reasons for what they're doing. The one that jumps out at me immediately is that maybe your lich's phylactery is like the One Ring from LotR: it radiates this intense, alluring aura of magic that draws people toward it. As DM, you could say "yes" to what your players are doing and even get some NPCs in on the action!

Istari
2012-02-01, 03:40 PM
It sounds more like the PC was coerced into serving the lich than the other way around, in which case there is no excuse for the other players to know what is going on since the player in question should be keeping the information secret and there probably have been no obvious clues to it.

onemorelurker
2012-02-01, 03:44 PM
It sounds more like the PC was coerced into serving the lich than the other way around, in which case there is no excuse for the other players to know what is going on since the player in question should be keeping the information secret and there probably have been no obvious clues to it.

I agree that this matters a lot, since the original post can be read either way. Draig, can you clarify whether the PC is serving the lich or vice-versa?

Draig
2012-02-01, 03:53 PM
I think a few readers misunderstood my OP or I worded it badly, The PC does not control the lich, The Lich has coerced the PC into working for him, and attached to that is a very funny curse. If the PC attempts to tell anyone about what the flask is he suddenly and abruptly gets a sense of amnesia (will save to prevent) and forgets everything about the flask, all that remains is a subtle sense that the flask is important and that he can't trust anyone with that knowledge. PC LOVES it because he'll be in the middle of saying something and then just go "wait... Nvm forgot what I was gonna say"

The Glyphstone
2012-02-01, 03:55 PM
So yeah, blatant and unforgivable metagaming on the party's behalf.

I'd say the best option is to change the phylactery to something else the PC had/has - say, a small object that was being stored inside the flask or glued to the bottom or something, and don't mention this fact anywhere the other PCs can hear it. Then let them steal the flask from each other to their heart's content and get nothing from it.

nyarlathotep
2012-02-01, 04:55 PM
If they don't know about the lich OOC then it's just them fighting over treasure no biggy. If they do know about him OOC then it might be metagaming but only because you as the DM should have actually kept it secret from them out of game. Just stating something in front of someone and forcing them to go through an investigation to find out about it even though they actually know is no fun and a sign of a poorly constructed story.

INoKnowNames
2012-02-01, 05:05 PM
I think a few readers misunderstood my OP or I worded it badly, The PC does not control the lich, The Lich has coerced the PC into working for him, and attached to that is a very funny curse. If the PC attempts to tell anyone about what the flask is he suddenly and abruptly gets a sense of amnesia (will save to prevent) and forgets everything about the flask, all that remains is a subtle sense that the flask is important and that he can't trust anyone with that knowledge. PC LOVES it because he'll be in the middle of saying something and then just go "wait... Nvm forgot what I was gonna say"

Okay, that changes the color of the perspective -quite- a bit. Honestly, considering the stereotype for most players (and I understand that to be quite a generalized statement on my part), it seems odd that there's even a fight over it. Although this is hardly relevant.

That being said, there's still an issue on how much the players actually know. Assuming the entire group had personalities similar to Tsukiko, and know they had a chance at serving a mighty Lich overlord, there might still be grounds for this to be completely proper activity on their parts.

Any chance you could fill in how much they -should- know about this Lich? If they only know it because they're sitting at the table, and shouldn't actually know about it otherwse, then it's a delivery issue based metagame problem, and they should be told to cut it out.

Tavor
2012-02-01, 05:09 PM
The phylactery of a very powerful Lich Lord has no business in a low level groups loot. And said very powerful Lich Lord should not be used by you the DM to force one player to betray the group.
Of course your group is now metagaming. Because they hate being bullied around by you a powerful NPC they have no chance to ever beat.

And if the group is medium to high level, why didn't they identify the phylactery?

Draig
2012-02-01, 05:20 PM
If they don't know about the lich OOC then it's just them fighting over treasure no biggy. If they do know about him OOC then it might be metagaming but only because you as the DM should have actually kept it secret from them out of game. Just stating something in front of someone and forcing them to go through an investigation to find out about it even though they actually know is no fun and a sign of a poorly constructed story.

The party had a chance to hear the lich but all failed their listen checks, in character they have no idea. But in a group as large as ours asking them to all leave everytime the lich comments or coerce's would have taken play to a crawl. And likewise passing a note would have not only slowed down gameplay but the party OOC always ask to know what the secret is, so even had I passed the note the party would have all known.

Mari01
2012-02-01, 05:29 PM
This is straight up metagaming at its finest. My understanding is that everyone got their share of loot, and one PC's share included the flask. Then, they all FAILED listen checks to hear something that one person heard. Unless that person is acting incredibly strangely or told the rest of the party, the others have no inclination to get their hands on the flask unless they were kleptos or something.

Draig
2012-02-01, 05:35 PM
The phylactery of a very powerful Lich Lord has no business in a low level groups loot. And said very powerful Lich Lord should not be used by you the DM to force one player to betray the group.
Of course your group is now metagaming. Because they hate being bullied around by you a powerful NPC they have no chance to ever beat.

And if the group is medium to high level, why didn't they identify the phylactery?

The group is ranged from levels 10-15. The lich is not having the player attack or betray the group, he is using the player as a conduit and given him instructions to deliver him to the capitol city of the Pelorians. And the party has no one equipped with the means to identify. And the Lich is a lower CR its a matter of brains vs brawn. If he could have just totalled the party he would have but seeing as he is not strong enough to he is using deception.

If you were hazy or unaware of the party's level just ask, assuming things always ends bad.

And as for "bullying" the party was already on a mission to the capitol. The lich is merely hitch hiking. What you title as bullying I describe as depth and character to a campaign story ark that, with the pc's help, is filled with enough twists and turns to make M. Night Shamylon get dizzy.

But I do thank you for your input.

Tavor
2012-02-01, 06:23 PM
Very interesting. I like to assume things when actual information is scarce and motives or behaviour of other members in rl gaming groups are questioned.
It tends to help surfacing the underlying issues at hand.

So many questions I dare not ask. But two things I have to say:

First:
I hope I am wrong, but diagnosis on a forum with such limited information is hard so I am assuming a worst case scenario.
Ask them why they are acting in that particular way and find out what their problem with the situation is.
Maybe they all want some special item they can talk to. Or wanted that one special place in your campaign and are now unhappy someone else got it. It might be hard to get an honest answer because players tend to be afraid of offending anyone, especially not if it is the only DM around town. So they vent their frustration in other ways.

Feel free to ignore this second one if you can find another solution together with your players:
Consider making the phylactery common knowledge and let the group deal with it. The current status quo seems to upset you and your groups dynamics. Give them an easy way out - additional Listen checks, a lapse in the curse, etc. Dragging this problem out for another session or two will only make it more complicated to deal with.

Draig
2012-02-01, 07:38 PM
The players all had equal opportunity to gain the item, even then it is a curse they would have gotten. The player in question didn't even choose the item, the rest of the group picked first and it was left. So to then say "oh I picked this cool elemental gem but I think the item we left u with is cooler now that I know its a phylactery" is childish behavior. I won't belittle the role of this player because the group trying to mess with him turned back on them. And likewise I won't make multiple items like the phylactery for each player. That's like saying that Lord of the rings should have had 9 rings to rule them all so that legolas and aragorn didn't feel left out. All the PC's have a role they will play, this pc just happened to snag on this hook.

And the party has had a few cases since, in game, to notice the phylactery and instead used metagame knowledge and failed.

Example: Pc with phylactery was sitting in the halls of the church staring intently at the phylactery, I told PC 2 and 3 to make a spot check. Instead PC 2 fired an eldritch blast at the phylactery and then proceeded to call the guards shouting "his flask! Something is evil about his flask!"
I told said player that the guards ignored him because his character had zero knowledge of what the flask really was.

But I digress to the original question B) in YOUR groups how do you handle metagaming? Do you simply tell the players to stop or do you start to enforce penalties on the PC that decides metagaming is ok?

FearlessGnome
2012-02-01, 08:27 PM
Your explanations and examples really makes this quite simple: They are metagaming. They are metagaming too much. The next time they pull a stunt like that, ask them to justify their decision, and if they cannot, give them fair warning: "The next time you try to pull something like that, there will be a penalty." The next time, let there be a penalty. Maybe they get less exp for the session. That said, obviously there should be opportunities to find out about the phylactery IC. But it sounds like there has been no shortage of these so far, so I doubt that will be a problem.

elvengunner69
2012-02-01, 11:00 PM
If I have something only one character knows I have the group take a 'break' and then take that one aside. I think this prevents what you are talking about. I do give the 'spot' checks if something seems out of order but all in all my group doesn't do this sort of thing.

Tarmikos
2012-02-01, 11:15 PM
As one of the players in this group, thankfully one who doesn't metagame, or at least makes a serious effort not to, even to the point of doing things I know will be bad for my character, I did have an idea for dealing with this, but need the playground's help on how to make it work.

I suggested providing false information ooc somehow. Misleading on an enemies strengths and weaknesses, or what will happen where, for example. The character shouldn't have the knowledge in game, and as such, shouldn't try using it. If the player doesn't try using it, they'll be fine. But if they try, it puts them in the wrong place at the wrong time, or actually strengthens the enemy, versus weakening it, etc etc. Does anyone have any ideas on how this could be pulled off?

For the record, I don't see this as cruel or misleading, as only someone metagaming will be at risk from the information.

INoKnowNames
2012-02-01, 11:15 PM
Example: Pc with phylactery was sitting in the halls of the church staring intently at the phylactery, I told PC 2 and 3 to make a spot check. Instead PC 2 fired an eldritch blast at the phylactery and then proceeded to call the guards shouting "his flask! Something is evil about his flask!"
I told said player that the guards ignored him because his character had zero knowledge of what the flask really was.

See, this is the kinda thing that you open the post with. This paints the picture needed to judge.

Instead of playing, they're using knowledge that they shouldn't actually have and taking advantage of that knowledge. I personally have only little experience playing, and even then only in Pbp, so it's not as prevalant an issue. And since I've never Dm'ed, I couldn't tell you how you'd go about doing it. But I'm all in support of punishing people that purposefully metagame. And that seems to be what's happening here.

Calanon
2012-02-02, 01:42 AM
Its me again playground, this time I'm having a little trouble with every DM's nemesis. Metagaming.

The example from my campaign is that the party found a bunch of loot, one of the items was a silver flask with gold runes on it. The party appraised it and divided the loot accordingly. Well the player with the flask did not realize he was now holding the phylactery of a very powerful Lich Lord. That night when he was in his room he was visited by the lich who is coerced the PC into being his minion. the pc loves the RP aspect of it BUT the problem now is that the warlock in the party is now trying to steal the flask. Only the minion PC knows what it is but now a few players are trying to destroy it or obtain it, when I asked why they said because they are just being curious. As a DM I believe this to be a pure metagame move on their part.

My questions are, A) is this in fact metagaming in your opinion. And B) if it is metagaming what penalties or ways would you use to handle it?


I'll make this very very simple for you my friend.

LICHES
SERVE
NO-FLESHY

:smallamused: The very idea of a (hopefully) powerful Lich serving any creature with a heart beat is simply absurd...

EDIT: My only hope is that your Lich Lord is simply using this as a con-game to trick the players into killing each other over a false Phylactery *HINT*

Greater EDIT: oh nvrm after re-reading the OP... Have the Lich Lord kill all the players, capture there souls into jars and then sell them on the "Black Market" and by black market i mean sell it to Pit Fiends...

TuggyNE
2012-02-02, 01:48 AM
Why exactly have several people so far misunderstood the direction of minionship? I thought it was fairly clear that the lich managed to get the PC under his control (as liches so often do), but I've seen at least two posts that reacted in surprise to the perception that the PC was somehow controlling the lich. Maybe under the assumption that the other players wouldn't be metagaming to get the phylactery if it didn't grant control somehow?

Odd. :smallconfused:

Edit:
EDIT: My only hope is that your Lich Lord is simply using this as a con-game to trick the players into killing each other over a false Phylactery *HINT*

This is a pretty great idea; any retcons OP can manage to invalidate the existing metagame knowledge will be very effective. The idea suggested earlier of having the phylactery actually be a coin or something is also promising.

Alienist
2012-02-02, 02:48 AM
... That night when he was in his room he was visited by the lich who is coerced the PC into being his minion. ...

The problem is that this sentence is not having of the parsing proper.

So some people are going to read this as:

The lich who is coerced BY the PC into being his minion

instead of:

The lich who coerceS the PC into being his minion

I knew what you meant, but then I can understand things given their reasonable context, whereas around here that is a skill people untrain in, since it has a negative synergy with their rules gymnastics skills. :D

Rakmakallan
2012-02-02, 10:18 AM
Just let them metagame to their hearts' content. Unless you are playing some straight-face, solemnly serious campaign of granite straightfacedness, let them try to steal and destroy the flask at will, as the guards keep intervening to break them up. Better yet, let the lich itself join the struggle and make the flask artifact-level, so it won't be easily destroyed. Sit back as you watch them enact gollum vs gollum vs gollum vs hobbit vs sauron vs (?) yelling "My precious." in front of the pelorian clerics, guards and citizens.

Mari01
2012-02-02, 10:38 AM
Just let them metagame to their hearts' content. Unless you are playing some straight-face, solemnly serious campaign of granite straightfacedness, let them try to steal and destroy the flask at will, as the guards keep intervening to break them up. Better yet, let the lich itself join the struggle and make the flask artifact-level, so it won't be easily destroyed. Sit back as you watch them enact gollum vs gollum vs gollum vs hobbit vs sauron vs (?) yelling "My precious." in front of the pelorian clerics, guards and citizens.

While that does sound entertaining, it's not dealing with the meta gaming problem. If they do it here, they will do it elsewhere.

Rakmakallan
2012-02-02, 10:48 AM
While that does sound entertaining, it's not dealing with the meta gaming problem. If they do it here, they will do it elsewhere.

So what? I never considered metagaming to be such a problem anyway. I do it, my players do it, I even encourage them to.

Mari01
2012-02-02, 11:00 AM
So what? I never considered metagaming to be such a problem anyway. I do it, my players do it, I even encourage them to.

That's your group's decision. In this case, this guy got shafted out of all the other treasure by them. They got first pick and now they also want what he got when they shouldn't even KNOW anything is special about it. That doesn't even sound fun. You lose out on treasure and then the group comes knocking for what you managed to scrape away.

Mari01
2012-02-02, 11:01 AM
So what? I never considered metagaming to be such a problem anyway. I do it, my players do it, I even encourage them to.

That's your group's decision. In this case, this guy got shafted out of all the other treasure by them. They got first pick and now they also want what he got when they shouldn't even KNOW anything is special about it. That doesn't even sound fun. You lose out on treasure and then the group comes knocking for what you managed to scrape away.

Ingus
2012-02-02, 01:18 PM
But I digress to the original question B) in YOUR groups how do you handle metagaming? Do you simply tell the players to stop or do you start to enforce penalties on the PC that decides metagaming is ok?

In my group we had an experience on this. I was a player with a secret pact with a Big Bad Deity of Evil Backstabbing (Cyric) to betray the party.
The PCs never knew, but since the Players did, the PCs "casually" tried to uncover the secret.

A good way to procede is talking to players and let them know that they will have to stop using OOC information. If they won't behave, just rule "the flask is still a flask, unless I rule you may suspect something. And unless I rule so, if you're curious about the flask, you have to be curious about any other item any other party member has". (<-- this is a bad solution, 'cause if you have to do so, you're in deep... problems :smalltongue: )

Edit: Saying "I'm not trying to ruin our campaign" when I had the big secret helped alot, along with "You'll have the occasion to stop my plan before it unfolds."

Slipperychicken
2012-02-02, 01:32 PM
Don't allow characters to act on knowledge they don't have. It's a simple as that, and goes for both PCs and NPCs. If they start pulling bull**** like "The flask looks kind of interesting, I will therefore steal it from the other player, rather than buying it, trading for it, or asking if I can look at it", you say: "That's metagaming. Your character doesn't do that because s/he doesn't have a good reason to".


Solutions include, but are not limited to: using an instant message system in which you can send exclusive messages (Skype, Facebook, etc.), passing notes, and making a rule that PCs don't take actions based on metagaming (if they say "I shoot the flask 'cuz target practice lawl", you say "no, you don't).

Averis Vol
2012-02-02, 01:55 PM
were i the PC ide just say "i'll trade you for your guys' share of the loot" then let them fight it out while you sit back and watch.

but that's me, and i'm a royal ******* when put in a situation of power. :smallbiggrin:

if they keep doing this just tell the Player to stop pulling it out. and every time the group goes to look for it just tell them they don't find it and write it off as a fail safe from the lich's part.

Draig
2012-02-02, 05:32 PM
The reason I hate metagaming is because it makes PC's act in ways they normally wouldn't. So to allow them to metagame will never be an option I allow and likewise most of my players hold to that rule.

As for this lich, I've decided that while the flask IS a phylactery it is not HIS phylactery. The lich's phylactery will a mundane item that the PC will be given but not be aware of its true purpose. And as for the PC's trying to steal and destroy it I'm toying with the idea that the lich will begin visiting the players who attempt to steal/destroy and will either curse them or otherwise make trouble for them without revealing what the flask is. Even if the pc's in game figure out the flask is a phylactery, destroying it will only hinder this other lich while the original can continue being a thorn in their side.

Dimers
2012-02-03, 02:05 AM
Oh, nice! Er, nice in that "that's so mean and not nice" way. You know. Anyway, I wholeheartedly support this plan, and I suggest making seem like you intended that to be the case all along. :smallbiggrin:

mikau013
2012-02-03, 07:02 AM
The best way to deal with situation like this is simple. You talk to your fellow players (yes the dm is a player too) about it out of the game. Before the game starts the next time, you point out that people were acting based on information their chars don't have. And that you don't find this fun. They might disagree with you and offer you more insights into why they do what they do, or they might agree with you and you can have a better gaming group as a result.

The Glyphstone
2012-02-03, 07:13 AM
The reason I hate metagaming is because it makes PC's act in ways they normally wouldn't. So to allow them to metagame will never be an option I allow and likewise most of my players hold to that rule.

As for this lich, I've decided that while the flask IS a phylactery it is not HIS phylactery. The lich's phylactery will a mundane item that the PC will be given but not be aware of its true purpose. And as for the PC's trying to steal and destroy it I'm toying with the idea that the lich will begin visiting the players who attempt to steal/destroy and will either curse them or otherwise make trouble for them without revealing what the flask is. Even if the pc's in game figure out the flask is a phylactery, destroying it will only hinder this other lich while the original can continue being a thorn in their side.

What happens when the other lich discovers what's going on, possibly confronting them personally?

Draig
2012-02-03, 11:18 AM
What happens when the other lich discovers what's going on, possibly confronting them personally?

It'll be jerry springer, DND style.


And I'm not entirely sure as of yet. It definitely leaves open a hook for a later adventure or at least am interesting encounter.