The Lich ritual

[Lorsa]

Becoming a lich is an act of horrible evil but how exactly does it work? Is it the fact that you becoming a lich evil in itself or is it something in the ritual that is horrible and evil? A player of mine asked if it was possible to see the aftereffects of a lich-becoming ritual (like tons of sacrificed people for example) and I realized I had o idea and the Monster Manual doesn't say.

[Garagos]

I know material components was described in a 2nd edition book if you can get your hands on some. I want to say it may have been in one of the Encyclopedia's of Magica. There are 4 and I can't remember which one. They're just in alphabetical order of magic items, so maybe the one that has P for phylactery or however you spell that word.

Also, in Forgotten Realms there is a ritual that allows you to become a Good aligned Lich. That is described in a 3.0 or 3.5 FR book but again not sure which one.

I think the idea of why its evil is because you are basically killing yourself and unnatrually prolonging your own life through undeath. Not something most people are real keen on. I wouldn't imagine most gods like it either. Its also usually done to gain ridiculous amounts of power to take over countries and such. Just my thoughts.

[Mnemnosyne]

It's never been fully expanded upon just what the horrible evil is, at least not in 3.5, to my knowledge, or even 3rd Edition.

Garagos is right about the ingredient list in the Encyclopedia Magica, though. The list is:

Arsenic (2 drops of the purest distillate).
Belladonna (1 drop of the purest distillate).
Blood (1 quart of blood from a dead pegasus foal, killed by wyvern venom).
Blood (1 quart from a dead demihuman slain by a phase spider).
Blood (1 quart from a vampire or a being infected with vampirism).
Heart (the intact heart of a humanoid killed by poisoning, a mixture of arsenic and belladonna must be used).
Reproductive glands (from seven giant moths, dead for less than 10 days, ground together).
Venom (1 pint or more, drawn from a phase spider less than 30 days prior).
Venom (1 pint or more, drawn from a wyvern less than 60 days prior).

In addition to this list, the entry for the Arcane Formula for a Lich (page 60 Encyclopedia Magica) describes the entire process. In 2nd Edition, there was no inherent act of great evil, though. All the above ingredients could, theoretically, be gathered without being all that evil, and nothing else in the entire thoroughly described process requires being evil at all.

[Bonzai]

I think that the evil being purpatrated is primarily against your soul. Tearing it away from the plane it was destined for, and trapping it in anobject for all eternity. In DnD morality, that is extremely evil.

[Psyren]

The idea is that you (the DM) are free to come up with something suitably gruesome. Spelling it out would simply invite players to cheat the system, such as finding non-evil ways to obtain every ingredient on Mnemosyne's list.

So instead, they tell you "it's unspeakably evil" and let you decide whether to define it more explicitly and how to make it so. It's the old "Figs and Mice" trick.

[Lorsa]

Right, so all I have to do is to come up with something myself that makes it seem evil yet not be so cliché as to simply seem comic. Maybe there should be some ingredients like "the heart of a paladin" or somesuch.

[Xzar]

Personally I like the idea that necromancy is just intrinsically evil, however I think there should be the occaisional very rare good lich, the exception that proves the rule. Or at least they start off as good, but the process of lichdom, and the many centuries divorced from human need and contact will warp them.

[Andezzar]

The idea is that you (the DM) are free to come up with something suitably gruesome. Spelling it out would simply invite players to cheat the system, such as finding non-evil ways to obtain every ingredient on Mnemosyne's list.Yeah and becoming a normal lich is much worse than becoming a dry lich. If te writers really intended for liches to be off-limits for PCs, why did they give the Template a Level Adustment?

Also the MM and SRD only say: "The process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil and can be undertaken only by a willing character. A lich retains all class abilities it had in life."
So while the transformation will set the character's alignment to evil upon completion, the lich is not compelled to act evilly afterwards contrary to for example lycanthropes. So especially alignment independent characters (e.g. Sorcerers and Wizards) can become a lich (possibly without being evil before) and become non-evil a short time later, because actions define alignment not the other way around.

[Psyren]

There are many examples of good liches in D&D if you want to go that route. In most settings they are rarer than the evil kind though, and usually duty-bound to safeguard or protect a specific place.

This seems more a story convenience than anything else. If there were a good lich running around freely, he would likely amass all kinds of allies and power for all the good deeds he's capable of doing across centuries; and when evil arises, it would be hard to justify why the PCs are even needed, or why he wouldn't simply outfit them from his trove. It's the "good dragon" problem on a larger scale.

[Andezzar]

This seems more a story convenience than anything else. If there were a good lich running around freely, he would likely amass all kinds of allies and power for all the good deeds he's capable of doing across centuries; and when evil arises, it would be hard to justify why the PCs are even needed, or why he wouldn't simply outfit them from his trove. It's the "good dragon" problem on a larger scale.Good point, if you want to use D&D as a simulation.

[Vaz]

Why would a willing lawful good ultra-goody two shoes willingly undertake an inherently disgusting evil to become a lich?

Outside of plot points where the only decision you can make is a bad decision; such as with Dragon Age; become the Archdemon, make an unborn baby an Archdemon, or let a typically good aligned character take the fall for you and become the Archdemon; there is little cause for the Champion of Heironeous to want to become a Lich; specifically because the act of becoming one is evil.

You can have a good dragon as much as an evil one. It's typical that Good Dragons are inherently benevolent towards Humans; that defines "good" apparently, in Fantasy, whereas "Evil" are those against Humans, or whatever race it is. When morality is skewed by social mores, such as with regards to human opinion compared to a "universal" opinion, Humans can seem inherently evil; destroying a planet, infighting "civil wars", capitalism and communism being devised purely by the greedy (outside of theoretical debates, obviously). You only need to look at some horrors perpetrated in the last hundred years to see how "Evil" the human race as a whole can be; looking on the outside in, we're all humans, and all alike; while this makes us range on all 9 alignments equally in DnD's oversimplification, it remains that on the DnD alignment wheel, voluntarily commiting an evil act; replace "Lich ritual" with "killing baby children", even if it's to eventually do good is something that the Lawful Good Solar's and Paladin's will not contemplate.

However; BoED I think goes some way to changing that; there's the Deathless, which makes the Undead less "evil" sounding; I know nothing makes Undead Evil, but it's frequently attributed to such, and Undead are frequently Evil anyhow; and there are several Good liches around; there's one in Eberron I think, in which the dying Elf Elders make themselves a Lich to pass on their wisdom, while the Dry Lich is the result of spending too much time out in the sun. I'm not too sure how it works with regards to the Template and Class levels; taking 10 levels in Walker in the Waste; the only way to get it, typically makes you a lich at ECL 20, at which point you get the Template added on, which is an LA+X Template; if it was a Template which could be gained by any other means, I can understand that, but it can't; it requires 10 Levels in WitW. Odd.

[Clericzilla]

Could someone point me to the rules for Good Aligned Lich?

This could work in my favor in the future.

EDIT: I found the good lich on page 90 in the book Monsters or Faerun. If anyone has more info I would love to see it.

[Psyren]

Could someone point me to the rules for Good Aligned Lich?

This could work in my favor in the future.

EDIT: I found the good lich on page 90 in the book Monsters or Faerun. If anyone has more info I would love to see it.

MoF is 3.0; you can find the 3.5 Good Lich in Libris Mortis 156.

[Silva Stormrage]

MoF is 3.0; you can find the 3.5 Good Lich in Libris Mortis 156.

Also Baelnorn Liches for elves are good aligned. I forget what book they are in though.

[Doxkid]

There are many examples of good liches in D&D if you want to go that route. In most settings they are rarer than the evil kind though, and usually duty-bound to safeguard or protect a specific place.

This seems more a story convenience than anything else. If there were a good lich running around freely, he would likely amass all kinds of allies and power for all the good deeds he's capable of doing across centuries; and when evil arises, it would be hard to justify why the PCs are even needed, or why he wouldn't simply outfit them from his trove. It's the "good dragon" problem on a larger scale.

A good lich will have to face many high power opponents who have a better shot of destroying him, if only because he has more time to amass enemies. The stronger any lich's enemies are the more likely they can do something about his/her phylactery; this is always true, but evil beings have better/more diverse means by which to attack the Lich than good beings...and the scruples encourage collateral damage when they do it.

He also has to deal with confusion among good groups and the gods that absolutely do not tolerate the undead: Pelor will be sending death squadron after death squadron, even when this lich is giving puppies to orphans and spreading sunshine/lollipops where ever he goes.

---

So basically, Good Liches (excluding Baelnornes, since elves are just that special) get the short end of every stick.

They have loads of evil enemies and said enemies will do horrible things in their attempts to kill, incapacitate, inconvenience the lich. They also have loads of good enemies, because plenty of Good groups are stupid and will happily destroy a being that devotes it's life towards good just because that good being looks icky. Finally they have adventurers attacking in droves, infesting the Lich's typical hangouts like roaches just because there's a little bit of money in killing a high level spellcaster.

That, of course, isn't getting into alignment arguments and slippery slopes and other such things that might come into play in some games or might influence some NPC liches.
---
I also like the explanation that messing with souls at all is considered a top tier evil offense, just because it pisses off gods. Or maybe they take it as a warning sign. A signal that something is off about someone; I certainly wouldn't begrudge them if that were the case.

If the first two thousand, eight hundred and seventy three Liches are all evil baby-eaters and then one or two good liches come around, you're likely to be a bit suspicious of the good ones...if you don't set to work killing before they can get the chance to do anything.

Sure, it's racial/undead profiling...but in a world were a man who you cant even see has the power to reset your mind, change your gender/level of animation/species, undo your very being, bounce you off the world, flick you into another dimension, turn you to stone, infest you with diseases that kill you while rewiring your mind/body, drain your soul away, take over your body and so on with a single action that is so fast it takes less than 6 seconds, I would be a bit nervous about people who broadcast the warning signs for "Evil guy who would happily drink wine from your still bloody skull" too.

[Andezzar]

Why would a willing lawful good ultra-goody two shoes willingly undertake an inherently disgusting evil to become a lich?I'm not talking about lawful good ultra goody two-shoes, but a neutral or possibly even chaotic good person could rationalize that he will be able to a lot more good if he was no longer shackled to his mortal body, alternately he could simply decide he did not have time for dying. I know there are other ways to agelessness but not every character knows everything.


Outside of plot points where the only decision you can make is a bad decision; such as with Dragon Age; become the Archdemon, make an unborn baby an Archdemon, or let a typically good aligned character take the fall for you and become the Archdemon; there is little cause for the Champion of Heironeous to want to become a Lich; specifically because the act of becoming one is evil.Yes becoming a lich is evil, but the character could balance the scales by the acts he commits after becoming one. I already mentioned two options that are not lose/lose situations. Characters with strong connections to deities (like clerics and paladins) are the least likely characters for something like that, I agree.


You can have a good dragon as much as an evil one. It's typical that Good Dragons are inherently benevolent towards Humans; that defines "good" apparently, in Fantasy, whereas "Evil" are those against Humans, or whatever race it is.That is news to me. AFAIK by D&D standards Good is altruistic and saving/promoting life whereas Evil is egotistical an promoting death and suffering. There is no bias to a certain race.


When morality is skewed by social mores, such as with regards to human opinion compared to a "universal" opinion, Humans can seem inherently evil; destroying a planet, infighting "civil wars", capitalism and communism being devised purely by the greedy (outside of theoretical debates, obviously).Not quite, while you certainly can call all of those actions evil there is no clue whether those acts or the disposition to commit such acts is inherent in humans.


looking on the outside in, we're all humans, and all alike; while this makes us range on all 9 alignments equally in DnD's oversimplification, it remains that on the DnD alignment wheel, voluntarily commiting an evil act;True it remains committing an evil act, but a character of any alignment can commit an evil act without becoming irrevocably evil. If the act is minor enough a shift to evil may not even be in order. Regardless whether a single act makes a character evil, there is not rule against making the character good again by committing good acts.
replace "Lich ritual" with "killing baby children", even if it's to eventually do good is something that the Lawful Good Solar's and Paladin's will not contemplate.As I said before those are the least likely candidates, but there are a whole lot of different people between the cliché paladin and the cliché baby-killing villain. Some of them may even be in a position to contemplate lichdom.


However; BoED I think goes some way to changing that; there's the Deathless, which makes the Undead less "evil" sounding;It always sounded as a cop out to me. While undeath upsets the natural order of things, wizards and other casters do that ona regular basis without being evil. Being sustained by negative energy to me is about as evil as antimatter. It may be destructive but not inherently evil.

I know nothing makes Undead Evil, but it's frequently attributed to such, and Undead are frequently Evil anyhow;At least to Detect Evil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm) it does. :smallwink:


I'm not too sure how it works with regards to the Template and Class levels; taking 10 levels in Walker in the Waste; the only way to get it, typically makes you a lich at ECL 20, at which point you get the Template added on, which is an LA+X Template; if it was a Template which could be gained by any other means, I can understand that, but it can't; it requires 10 Levels in WitW. Odd.Yes acquiring templates through PrCs is weird. Technically the walker in the waste can be eligible for the Sere Rite at ECL 15 (Caster 5/WitW 10), if and how he becomes ECL 20 after the completion of the rite is unclear. He does not have enough XP for being ECl 20.

[kabreras]

Right, so all I have to do is to come up with something myself that makes it seem evil yet not be so cliché as to simply seem comic. Maybe there should be some ingredients like "the heart of a paladin" or somesuch.

The "still beating hearth of a virgin" is always a good pick for evil stuff
If you make the virgin dauther of a paladin it is even better !

[Doxkid]

The "still beating hearth of a virgin" is always a good pick for evil stuff
If you make the virgin dauther of a paladin it is even better !

Why would you take a virgin's hearth? Don't they need that to keep their house warm? It's not like they can cuddle up with someone to share heat...:smallbiggrin:

---

Besides, the abilities a lich possesses are somewhat anathemic; they aren't pleasant to be around at all, what with the fear aura and permanent paralysis and such. Townsfolk are extremely vulnerable to all of those things.

Even if a lich is Good-ish, being a spellcaster and innately doing bad things to people just by being around them is certain to make the commoners skittish. Which leads to them asking good aligned groups to help stop "the vile Lich-necromancer's evil acts" of doing the gardening, performing some spell research and writing poetry while on the porch of his floating castle.

One thing leads to another and a unit of paladins is defeated by the lich; some might even be injured or slain. News trickles upward that "the abomination against life has attacked us! ...while we stormed his sitting room..." and then you get important beings involved; Dragons, Solars, PCs...

[Shining Wrath]

I think it's more or less up to you. Were I to have to rule on this as DM, I'd say that every evil lich takes a different path. There may be ingredients and rituals in common, but every person who becomes a lich has different motivations, and the final ritual is unique for each lich. However, anyone not evil who heard the final ritual described would be saddened or horrified or disgusted, and even other evil people would be taken aback, in a "wow, that's pretty extreme" sort of way.

Because I'm me, I'd say that at the end the lich must sacrifice whatever mattered most to them in their natural life in order to become a lich. And by natural life I don't mean "5 minutes prior to the final ritual", I mean back before they first conceived any desire to be a lich. Your spouse, your curiosity, your best friend, your enjoyment of good food, whatever. Whatever would have been regarded as your quiddity prior to starting down the path, at the end of the path that must be given up.

Other DM's mileage doubtless varies.

As for a good lich, I'd use the Eberron Aerendal elves and their Undying Court as a guide. Rather than living forever because they have tapped into the Negative Energy Plane, they live forever because they have tapped into the Positive Energy Plane.

[Shining Wrath]

The "still beating hearth of a virgin" is always a good pick for evil stuff
If you make the virgin dauther of a paladin it is even better !

I think he's trying to avoid cliche, and I refer you to OOTS #863, panel #6.

I'd say forcing a Paladin to watch while his or her child was drained by a vampire, and then the child - vampire drains their parent, might be a little more creative. but you are free to disagree. :smallcool:

[Andezzar]

I'd say forcing a Paladin to watch while his or her child was drained by a vampire, and then the child - vampire drains their parent, might be a little more creative. but you are free to disagree. :smallcool:This and the whole virgin sacrifice thing sound more like an offering to an evil deity or part of a bargain struck with a fiend so they seem fitting for divine liches and nowhere does it say that lichdom has to be bestowed by some outside party. Additionally most liches are said to be arcane casters. These requirements don't sound much like part of a procedure to basically tell the laws of nature to shut up and leave the wizard alone.

If you need to some evil for the sake of evil, trick the paladin into believing that is child needs to be killed for the sake of all and when he has committed that evil act, pull the veil from his eyes.

[Doxkid]

Virgin Sacrifice and paladin torture are the best two ways of achieving undeath.

See, this is why people automatically assume necromancers and undead are evil. What about the scholar who simply needs more time to study? That's a classic archetype for a lich, but it doesn't involve harming people at all. He's just a very focused, very lonely old man who lives in his tower studying books of spells for all of eternity.

Or the scientist who has decided the best route for research is to skip past mortal concerns, going straight for "infinite time to study and experience the cosmos". This one makes just as much sense for a Lich as the classic "Evil guy who needs more time to torture puppies"; the Scientist has more use for living test subjects who have been paralyzed his bis touch and could use the mental bonuses in his research. The Evil Lich will probably end up killing most people he captures anyway, so how long it stays paralyzed is moot.

Crawling Darkness vs Playing with Fire has a large role in this, yes, but for every few villains raising bone armies there should be a few researchers with poor interpersonal skills.

[Andezzar]

I totally agree.

[Shining Wrath]

This and the whole virgin sacrifice thing sound more like an offering to an evil deity or part of a bargain struck with a fiend so they seem fitting for divine liches and nowhere does it say that lichdom has to be bestowed by some outside party. Additionally most liches are said to be arcane casters. These requirements don't sound much like part of a procedure to basically tell the laws of nature to shut up and leave the wizard alone.

If you need to some evil for the sake of evil, trick the paladin into believing that is child needs to be killed for the sake of all and when he has committed that evil act, pull the veil from his eyes.

Or, trick the Paladin into killing someone else's child - the sole heir to the throne, the only support for an aging saintly widow, etc.

[Shining Wrath]

See, this is why people automatically assume necromancers and undead are evil. What about the scholar who simply needs more time to study? That's a classic archetype for a lich, but it doesn't involve harming people at all. He's just a very focused, very lonely old man who lives in his tower studying books of spells for all of eternity.

Or the scientist who has decided the best route for research is to skip past mortal concerns, going straight for "infinite time to study and experience the cosmos". This one makes just as much sense for a Lich as the classic "Evil guy who needs more time to torture puppies"; the Scientist has more use for living test subjects who have been paralyzed his bis touch and could use the mental bonuses in his research. The Evil Lich will probably end up killing most people he captures anyway, so how long it stays paralyzed is moot.

Crawling Darkness vs Playing with Fire has a large role in this, yes, but for every few villains raising bone armies there should be a few researchers with poor interpersonal skills.

And that depends on your worldview. Are living beings good / evil, or are only deeds good or evil? If your alignment means "I normally do deeds of this type", then you can have a good person become a lich because, as you say, they have poor interpersonal skills. The person remains good because most of their deeds and intentions are good, even though there are some evil deeds mixed in.

I think that RAW though D&D assumes that alignment is intrinsic to a creature. That's why you can't be a lawful barbarian or a chaotic monk. In that case, if you take the RAW lich alignment of "Any Evil" per D20SRD, anyone who winds up a lich must BE evil. Not merely have done something evil to complete the ritual; no matter where you started alignment-wise, the process you followed to become a lich must have changed your very nature to an evil one. In which case the researcher with poor interpersonal skills may have started onto the path to lich intending merely to have time enough to study, but by the end of the path they will use the knowledge gained for evil purposes. The path they follow corrupts them. Think "Elric of Melnibone".

[Fable Wright]

Personally I like the idea that necromancy is just intrinsically evil, however I think there should be the occaisional very rare good lich, the exception that proves the rule. Or at least they start off as good, but the process of lichdom, and the many centuries divorced from human need and contact will warp them.

:smallannoyed:
Why? Why should necromancy automatically be labelled "Evil?" Back in the old 2e days, Necromancy didn't have the negative connotations it was given in 3rd edition. Healing spells were Necromancy, and it was just another school of magic. It did have a slight negative connotation, as Necromancy got the most powerful spells (at the cost of a smaller breadth of spells), which may have hurt its rep a bit as evil people who wanted power were more drawn to the school, but you didn't have anyone claiming that the entire school was evil. One evil school of magic when all the rest are neutral makes no sense...

For some reason, hatred of Necromancers crept in with third edition. They made Conjuration (Healing) spells for the sole purpose of taking anything good, like healing, out of necromancy, and then they made an obvious villain out of the Necromancer. Why is the Conjurer who forces free-willed extraplanar entities into indentured servitude or slavery allowed to be good, when the Necromancer who reanimates a corpse without a soul, and so is mindless and doesn't mind being ordered around in the least, forced to be evil, or at best morally questionable neutral? I'm sorry for the off-topic rant, but people calling all neromancy and undead evil is a pet peeve of mine.

[ArcturusV]

That is news to me. AFAIK by D&D standards Good is altruistic and saving/promoting life whereas Evil is egotistical an promoting death and suffering. There is no bias to a certain race.

I mention this because there IS bias inherent in the game based on Race. You run into a Devil. Doesn't matter what it is, what it does, why it's there, etc. It can be anything from an Imp to the King of Hell, doesn't matter. Good is defined by killing it on sight. Time to figure out mitigating circumstances? Quick Augury spell to figure out if you should kill it? Nah. Just kill it. Can't even rely on Detect Evil (It'll automatically ping based on race or possibly items), even if it did make that conscious choice to be neutral, or good, as you mention a would be Lich might consider. This used to be a lot more common place in DnD as well, not just limited to outsiders, but things like... See a goblin? Instantly smite it. Orc? Instantly smite it. Drow? Instantly smite it before Drizz't was a thing, now Instantly Smite it for being an annoying emo cliche typically.

So the idea of "Good" being based on Race in DnD isn't a new thing. Not at all. You can say they're starting to move away from it a little. Though examples of Race based Good/Evil and such still exist so long as Players can run around going, "What, they had green skin, fangs, and horns. Course it was evil and I was supposed to smite them."

I'm not saying that's a bad thing. The game would kinda suck if you had to go and Vet every enemy and ensure it's evil and so forth. And you'd loose the Heroic Crusader sort of feel. Just saying, "Good" being subjective to race exists.

But to the point... the unspeakably evil part. That's the kicker. It's unspeakable. It shouldn't be statted. The moment it's statted, it's less unspeakable. And people will try to find a way around the "Evil" aspect of it. And once they do that Liches become less special because any Arcane character that qualifies for it will probably want Lichhood, because it's not that bad a package at all. Particularly for high level arcane users who probably can keep their Phylactery entirely safe barring basically DM Bolt Wrath of God Fiat.

So I see Lichdom as a Retirement option for PCs. If you become a Lich, you're no longer a PC. You might get cameo appearances. I might let you play Lich PC for a one shot appearance. But it's not going to be your player character.

So the only time you'd have to worry about the Lich Ritual is, as you mentioned, if your PCs stumbled across it. Probably as a means to find the Lich's Phylactery, tracking down his known haunts, etc, as part of an overarching plot arc. And here I'd just be vague, with details. You don't have to explain how things were used, or even necessarily what they were.

Throw in something like, "You find in the ritual chamber three bronze statues carved into mockeries of Lawful Good, Neutral Good, and Chaotic Good outsiders. The statues are stained with soot. Closer inspection notices that the mouth and eyes of the statue are open, the structure is hollow, and there is a hinge where the whole statue opens up" or something. It gives the right feel... that something is wrong. That it's a perversion of Good being involved. But you don't KNOW what it is.

[Doxkid]

^ Fair enough; evil is evil, right? The standard lich is Evil with a capital "E" and only specific liches from other books can be neutral or good. I'll concede that to you without batting an eye.

But then Sanctify the Wicked (http://dndtools.eu/spells/book-of-exalted-deeds--52/sanctify-the-wicked--93/) from a former ally hits the lich. So now he's good. Or Evil. Or neutral. Whatever alignment he is, it's probably within a step of his old one since that person was a former ally and they traveled together for long enough for one to get 9th level spells and the other to become a lich.

What now?

[hymer]

@ DMoD: Have you read the Complete Necromancer's Handbook for 2nd edition?
Necromancy gets a very evil shtick in 2nd ed, so much so that there's talk of white (non-evil), grey (questionable) and black necromancy (clearly evil)*. Those are probably the forerunners of giving a spell the Evil descriptor. What isn't outright evil from that book is at least creepy.
Anyway, I'm entirely for necromancy as an arcane school being things Man Was Not Meant to Tamper With. Something horrible happened to undead when people decided vampires were so cool they should be heroes. Need I point out where that led?
Taking away the creepy or evil side to necromancy means taking away that which makes it unique and fascinating from a fluff perspective.

* Not sure those definitions are from CNH - I can look them up if you want.

[Andezzar]

I mention this because there IS bias inherent in the game based on Race. You run into a Devil. Doesn't matter what it is, what it does, why it's there, etc. It can be anything from an Imp to the King of Hell, doesn't matter. Good is defined by killing it on sight.That is plain wrong. Good is defined by preventing the devil from doing evil and protecting the world from them. Killing based on race/creature type is not inherently good. In most cases it will be justified to kill the devil, because that is the only way of preventing him from doing harm, but that does not make the killing in itself good.


Time to figure out mitigating circumstances? Quick Augury spell to figure out if you should kill it?That would be good.


Can't even rely on Detect Evil (It'll automatically ping based on race or possibly items), even if it did make that conscious choice to be neutral, or good, as you mention a would be Lich might consider.Yes it would ping as evil but that does not necessarily mean the creature is indeed evil. Killing a creature that is not evil possibly even good would not be good at all, it would be most definitely evil. Especially paragons of Law and Goodness cannot err on the side of caution.


This used to be a lot more common place in DnD as well, not just limited to outsiders, but things like... See a goblin? Instantly smite it. Orc? Instantly smite it. Drow? Instantly smite it before Drizz't was a thing, now Instantly Smite it for being an annoying emo cliche typically.Yes there are races/types that have a higher fequency of evil individuals in their species/society, but that does not justify killing them upon sight. Even among those types that are described as "Always X Evil" there are statistically irrelevant individuals that are not X Evil:

Always: The creature is born with the indicated alignment. The creature may have a hereditary predisposition to the alignment or come from a plane that predetermines it. It is possible for individuals to change alignment, but such individuals are either unique or rare exceptions.
The only problem with the lich is that he does not have a qualifier. IHMO though even without a qualifier the evil alignment component should not be more frequent in liches than Always (meaning the glossary definition).


I'm not saying that's a bad thing. The game would kinda suck if you had to go and Vet every enemy and ensure it's evil and so forth. And you'd loose the Heroic Crusader sort of feel. Just saying, "Good" being subjective to race exists.Well you could also not care and become less than a posterboy for Lawful Stupid Good, or they could rationalize that this is a necessary evil for the greater good, or they could realize that genocide based on looks is inherently evil and change. Especially if the rest of the world does not see this, it would be a heroic struggle.


Throw in something like, "You find in the ritual chamber three bronze statues carved into mockeries of Lawful Good, Neutral Good, and Chaotic Good outsiders. The statues are stained with soot. Closer inspection notices that the mouth and eyes of the statue are open, the structure is hollow, and there is a hinge where the whole statue opens up" or something. It gives the right feel... that something is wrong. That it's a perversion of Good being involved. But you don't KNOW what it is.I like that idea.

[Rijan_Sai]

^ Fair enough; evil is evil, right? The standard lich is Evil with a capital "E" and only specific liches from other books can be neutral or good. I'll concede that to you without batting an eye.

But then Sanctify the Wicked (http://dndtools.eu/spells/book-of-exalted-deeds--52/sanctify-the-wicked--93/) from a former ally hits the lich. So now he's good. Or Evil. Or neutral. Whatever alignment he is, it's probably within a step of his old one since that person was a former ally and they traveled together for long enough for one to get 9th level spells and the other to become a lich.

What now?

(I'm only a couple of days late to the party...)
"What now?"
Either: 1) The lich laughs because hi soul is nowhere near his body, and proceeds to do Bad Things to his old friend, or 2) the spell works, and one year later the "reformed" lich does Bad Things to his now hated enemy.

Not really a great spell against a lich...

[Norin]

Some info on the ritual and such for the Baelorn (moral elf liches) can be found in the FR wiki (http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Baelnorn_lich).

In that article you can also find sources like rulesbooks and novels.