PDA

View Full Version : Your opinion on Lich's alignment



Hurlbut
2007-02-07, 04:40 PM
I have to ask, what does everyone has to say about the Lich's alignment?
That when becoming a Lich, your alignment is fchanged to evil?

jjpickar
2007-02-07, 04:45 PM
Generally, in standard D&D, it is considered an evil act to become a lich but there are exceptions in some settings. Like Baelnorns from Forgotten Realms who are good elf liches. I guess it's how people feel about undead in the campaign.

SpiderBrigade
2007-02-07, 04:45 PM
It's more that, in order to become a Lich, you have to do some rituals and things that are so unholy, you couldn't be anything but evil in the first place.

Some people disagree that this should be the case, though.

Hurlbut
2007-02-07, 04:52 PM
Well I would like to point out that in Savage Species, P. 146
"...do not have to change their alignment to evil..."

So a Lich could be still good, althought such thing is the least likely of the two sides. The rituals to become a Lich that change your alignment to evil (or you were already evil in the first place) would probably represent the easiest way which require an evil act.

Indon
2007-02-07, 04:53 PM
While you would have to pretty much be evil in order to enact the rituals to become the standard lich, I don't imagine this prevents a lich from perhaps changing/repenting over the millenia of its' unholy existence, and becoming neutral or (less realistically) even good.

ExHunterEmerald
2007-02-07, 04:54 PM
I think it's ultimately evil to become one, but you aren't bound to it eternally...although, you're powered by negative energy, so I'd rule you read as evil despite your actual alignment.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-07, 05:34 PM
I think it's ultimately evil to become one, but you aren't bound to it eternally...although, you're powered by negative energy, so I'd rule you read as evil despite your actual alignment.

Ever heard of ghosts?

Grey Watcher
2007-02-07, 05:46 PM
Yeah, the standard rules state that you can only become a lich voluntarily, and that doing so involves unspeakably evil rituals, so yeah, standard rules are going to say that most liches are evil. Again, you don't have to stay that way (though really, if you had to murder babies or something to become a lich, your continued existence becomes a moral quandry if you're now Good).

Nothing that says you can't houserule changes, though. I mean, why can't liches be non-Evil if you want them to be? For that matter, who says it has to be voluntary?

Saph
2007-02-07, 06:46 PM
I prefer keeping it as always or almost always evil. The Lich text strongly implies that the kind of rituals you have to do to become one are so horrific that they can't go into further details without giving the book a "Mature Content Only" label. If you're doing that kind of thing you really are not very likely to be a nice person.

Another possibility, which isn't stated in the rules but which has always made sense to me, is that sticking your soul in a phylactery maims it in some permanent way, making you even more twisted than you were before (and you were probably pretty bad to begin with). I never really liked the "good liches" niche templates such as baelnorns for this reason.

- Saph

Grey Watcher
2007-02-07, 07:17 PM
Another possibility, which isn't stated in the rules but which has always made sense to me, is that sticking your soul in a phylactery maims it in some permanent way, making you even more twisted than you were before (and you were probably pretty bad to begin with). I never really liked the "good liches" niche templates such as baelnorns for this reason.

- Saph

I'd never thought it out quite so specifically, but yeah, that was always my assumption with most Undead being listed as Evil. Something about becoming Undead warps your soul, making it unlikely that you'll come out of the process being non-Evil. The Monster Manual even says as much about ghosts (if memory serves, I was looking at it last night, but I was also pretty sleepy).

Skyserpent
2007-02-07, 07:24 PM
Why not just pop a Helm of Opposite Alignment on a Lich?...

Galahad
2007-02-07, 07:28 PM
A normal Lich is powered by negative energy, which is generally considered evil (evil clerics using inflict spells and rebuking undead and whatnot). If a good player of yours wants to be a lich, consider the Deathless from BoED and Eberron. They're basically positive-energy undead, with some slight changes in immunities. Wouldn't be to hard to re-do the Lich template with them.

Melrob
2007-02-07, 07:35 PM
Let's see. You sacrifice the life of a sentient being and create a deadly poison with which to instantly kill yourself during the ceremony. God knows what else you have done to gather the ingredients to make such a vile potion....

If succesfull, you then have to watch as the negative energy that now binds you strips away your flesh, revealing the bone and cartilage beneath. Every new day brings more bone...as the semblence of the person you used to be rots irrevocably in a festering scent of decay and death. Finally, when you look to the mirror, you see burning coals of hellish tinder staring back at you. You no longer even recognise yourself.

Your comrades shun you ... maybe even hunt you down.

Society shuns you ... maybe even hunt you down.

My mage is becoming one very shortly (for good reason :P)...I'll come back and tell you how it goes if I succeed;)

But house rules is house rules...if the above methods (which are but a guideline) are willingly altered and agreed by the DM...anything is possible.

Swordguy
2007-02-07, 08:17 PM
Why not just pop a Helm of Opposite Alignment on a Lich?...

Now THAT is a darned good idea.

Thomas
2007-02-07, 08:22 PM
Evil liches is just fluff. There's plenty of non-evil liches in D&D as is. (Not just baelnorns, but arch-liches, too.) They were already around in AD&D.

Different liches use different ceremonies (in fact, even different evil liches would, reasonably, use entirely different ceremonies). I doubt there's anything vile or evil about the rituals elves undergo to become baelnorns.

RandomNPC
2007-02-07, 09:08 PM
basic rules state liches commit evil acts and whatnot. yeay for them, liches are evil in my game.

but what if, to protect the future, ya know, the far future, someone was willing to commit horrible crazy things in the present. because honnestly im sure someone who doesn't detect as evil would preform lich making rituals if they could do something they think is important. think miko would go that far for what she thinks is right?

PinkysBrain
2007-02-07, 09:18 PM
Personally I am with the BoED on that one, the cause never justifies the means. The moment you start rationalizing evil acts like that you start sliding towards evil (as Miko). The future is not knowable, you need to have faith in the fundamental morality of the universe ... nothing good comes from evil.

Of course if you use a more muddy system of morality modeled on modern secular thought that's all irrelevant.

PS. that said, it's easy enough to write becoming a good lich into a character background ... redemption is always possible.

Quietus
2007-02-07, 09:24 PM
basic rules state liches commit evil acts and whatnot. yeay for them, liches are evil in my game.

but what if, to protect the future, ya know, the far future, someone was willing to commit horrible crazy things in the present. because honnestly im sure someone who doesn't detect as evil would preform lich making rituals if they could do something they think is important. think miko would go that far for what she thinks is right?

As a DM, I'd definately consider that to be a nonevil act, somewhat - but it certainly wouldn't be Good. Perhaps with use of the Deathless stuff it might be possible to make a Good-aligned Lich, but in that above case, I would allow a player to remain neutral - but not good, as a Good character would balk at such things, even if they knew it would help. There has to be some slide there, to perform such heinous acts.

Thomas
2007-02-08, 12:05 AM
Doing evil "for the greater good" is evil, at least in the D&D cosmology; the evil actions you commit have a cosmic signifigance that probably outweighs the eventual (and probably largely neutral) outcome.

And as actual moral evaluation, I'd definitely say doing evil "for the greater good" undermines the purpose and is evil. It's all just rationalization.

ExHunterEmerald
2007-02-08, 02:00 AM
Ever heard of ghosts?

No. No I have not. I have never once heard of a ghost in my lifetime. Pray tell, what is a ghost? Some form of vegetable?

averagejoe
2007-02-08, 02:37 AM
Litches are evil because undead are evil. And I don't mean within the context of DnD rules. I mean, come on, they're walking corpses. Not alive but walking=evil. Yeah, maybe I'm an undead racist.

Green Bean
2007-02-08, 02:44 AM
Well, according to the SRD


The process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil and can be undertaken only by a willing character.

I always figured that meant that you had to be willing to do an evil ritual, you had evil to try and become a lich in the first place. After that, I figured since your very soul is separate from your body, you can't really make any permanent alignment changes.

Melrob
2007-02-08, 04:23 AM
Baelnorn and Archlich are Monsters of Faerun templates, they are not 'liches': they are Baelnorn and Archliches. The Op asked about the 'lich' which is currently, in 3.5 rules, described as 'any evil'....the process of becoming one (as stated above) is unspeakably evil. Only the DM of a particular group will rule otherwise. Let's not fuzz the issue with templates of special lich types which may or may not exist in his campaign.

daggaz
2007-02-08, 05:04 AM
I love how everybody misquotes this one. Thank you television!


It's, "The ends don't necessarily justify the means."


Saying it with the qualifier 'never' makes it just as black and white, and just as inflexible and incorrect, as ommiting the qualifier entirely, which is paramount to using the qualifier 'always.' (TV's favorite evil moral).


Do cops have the right to shoot people? Do we put people in jail? Would you beat the crap out of a person who threatened your family, even kill him if need be?


Think about every negative thing that we or our society does, in the name of the greater good. Then think long and hard about the ends never justifying the means.. Hell, just think about paying your taxes.

Here's one you can't argue with. Would you stab a little baby with a big needle, and make him cry? What if that needle will keep him from being crippled or killed by Polio?

PinkysBrain
2007-02-08, 11:16 AM
Saying it with the qualifier 'never' makes it just as black and white
The system of morality espoused in BoED is black and white. I didn't quote it exactly, but I did not mislead in the way I paraphrased what they said (see page nine and pay special attention to the sections with "the fundamental answer is no" and "this view is ultimately misguided").


Here's one you can't argue with. Would you stab a little baby with a big needle, and make him cry? What if that needle will keep him from being crippled or killed by Polio?I won't argue with it, I'll simply say I don't consider it an evil act.

Causing the baby pain by experimenting on him to save the lives of millions of other babies, that would be an evil act.

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-08, 11:25 AM
No. No I have not. I have never once heard of a ghost in my lifetime. Pray tell, what is a ghost? Some form of vegetable?

Yes. Yes it is. It is an incorporeal vegetable powered by negative energy that may be either good or evil.

Sir_Ophiuchus
2007-02-08, 12:29 PM
Sometimes becoming a lich doesn't require a ritual. Take a 20th-level Dread Necromancer, for example. It just happens (your fluff may vary). Also, if your Dread Necro had the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat (pretty much all of them do), it's be quite easy to fluff about them being warped by their magic but not neccesarily being evil. Not good, but possibly neutral.

The innate evilness of some magic is just silly anyway. I mean, Deathwatch? Best low-level utility spell for a healer to have. But Good clerics (by the RAW) can't cast it. What the heck?

OzymandiasVolt
2007-02-08, 12:41 PM
Yeah, the Deathwatch thing IS stupid beyond belief. "Oh no, you're EVILLY checking everyone's lifesigns. WITH EVIL."

ExHunterEmerald
2007-02-08, 01:41 PM
Yes. Yes it is. It is an incorporeal vegetable powered by negative energy that may be either good or evil.
So, this vegetable...

...has nothing to do with anything? Maybe I'm misinterpreting 'cause I just woke up, but if I was saying that you'd detect as evil, but could still be good or evil, and the ghost is the same way, what was the point of this? Or were you quoting it to tell me that someone already had the same idea and I was mirroring an official stance?

Quietus
2007-02-08, 01:45 PM
So, this vegetable...

...has nothing to do with anything? Maybe I'm misinterpreting 'cause I just woke up, but if I was saying that you'd detect as evil, but could still be good or evil, and the ghost is the same way, what was the point of this? Or were you quoting it to tell me that someone already had the same idea and I was mirroring an official stance?

It was an argument that pertained to someone saying that Liches are evil by necessity because they're undead. Ghosts, too, are undead - but they can be good-aligned. Does it actually say in the MM that they register as evil anyway?

FdL
2007-02-08, 02:17 PM
Yes. Lich = Evil.
D&D is black & white. And Liches are definitely in the black side of things (even that is an understatement).

Tola
2007-02-08, 02:51 PM
Evil or not, I think it's unlikely that they'd stay Evil for very long.

They're near-completely immortal, why should they give a damm what other people think?

I can't think of any Immortal=type being anything but Neutral and having to be heavily persuaded into doing much of anything that doesn't affect them or their interests directly. They just do what they like, not what other people like...

Mewtarthio
2007-02-08, 05:59 PM
You mean, like, say, evil gods?

Evil people don't care what others think; they act in their own best interests, regardless of what pain it causes. Why would immortality change this?

AtomicKitKat
2007-02-09, 12:19 AM
If succesfull, you then have to watch as the negative energy that now binds you strips away your flesh, revealing the bone and cartilage beneath. Every new day brings more bone...as the semblence of the person you used to be rots irrevocably in a festering scent of decay and death. Finally, when you look to the mirror, you see burning coals of hellish tinder staring back at you. You no longer even recognise yourself.

I might be wrong, but I believe that's just standard decay. The negative energy doesn't do anything bad to their skin or soft tissue.

Quietus
2007-02-09, 12:36 AM
I might be wrong, but I believe that's just standard decay. The negative energy doesn't do anything bad to their skin or soft tissue.

Pretty much. And if you're that worried about it, you can just cast Gentle Repose on yourself regularly. It's what, caster level 11 to become a Lich, and most people are higher? Even at level 11, your Gentle Repose only has to be cast every week and a half, you'll be plenty fine.

Melrob
2007-02-09, 03:02 AM
Okay so I was liberal with my words :P But Gentle Repose isn't an answer, well in our campaign anyway. It works on dead flesh, we view undead as creatures and less like objects. Those who chose to become a lich should suffer the drawbacks of doing so...barring shapechange and the like. Of course one true seeing spell and bingo. But again, that's just our world, I've read other sources allowing Gentle repose to work on the livign dead.

Jade_Tarem
2007-02-09, 04:15 PM
I was almost certain that the only ways to be a "good" lich were if:

A) You found a way to become a lich without murdering babies or whatever it is in the standard ritual that turns you evil. The alternative race swapping rituals in the SSG come to mind.

B) You were compelled, magically or otherwise, to perform the ritual.

C) You have since atoned, and we're talking a lot of atonement. Or...

D) You discovered, during life, a secret to the universe so dark and sinister that you were willing to accept lichdom as a way of guarding it throughout eternity, and the lich ritual was somehow a lesser evil as opposed to allowing for even a chance that this dark secret be known by others someday.

I think that's pretty much it for good liches, just about any other route a la most of the easy routes turn you evil.

Gamebird
2007-02-09, 05:17 PM
The Detect Evil spell says that all undead detect as Evil. Undead have their own line, separate and independent from "Evil creature".

However, this does not preclude said undead from having an alignment other than Evil.

So a Good-aligned ghost would detect positively under both Detect Good and Detect Evil.

Arceliar
2007-02-09, 05:31 PM
Don't forget there's Deathless in the Eberron setting and the Book of Exalted Deeds. All the benefits of undead without the evil, I don't see why a lich couldn't be adapted for Deathless instead of Undead.

Otherwise, Jade Tarem's section D post seems the easiest excuse--er, I mean reason--to become a lich.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-09, 08:07 PM
I heard someone was preparing ghost vegetable stew from an old Machiavelli cook book. Am I too late?

The way I see it, this all depends on how becoming a lich works in a campaign. In Faerun, famously, the act apparently needn't be so evil that it instantly changes a good alignment to evil. In standard/Greyhawk, however, it apparently involves desecration of some form, given the flavor text. Maybe even a quadrupal teen homicide torture/sacrifice to our unholy lord and master, Cthulhu.

So in most regular settings, yes, liches are innately evil as they are the desecrated walking dead, fueled by pure evil. No, I don't think that can ever be good like that, since evil is literally in their veins. In Faerun, this is apparently not exactly how it works. In your own campaign? I'd say it works according to how the process to becoming one works. Perhaps it's simply damning your own soul to remain in the mortal plains in your's. Or maybe it's eating a designated number of humanoid babies. Since it's such a beloved template, I really suggest that everyone think through it when they first make their campaign world.

In mine, it's all about making a blood pact with a god of death (there's two, one good and one evil) wherein you sacrifice your body and soul to aquire great power. You pledge undying (heh) loyalty to the god you choose, and they can rip the powers from you immediately if you fail in whatever mission they put you to. So once you go evil-lich, you're evil-lich for life.

Amphimir Míriel
2007-02-09, 10:57 PM
Some people here probably dislike the Harry Potter books, but for those who don't, the description of Voldemort's tools to immortality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horcrux) seem relevant to the topic on hand.

I find that this method of "rending one's soul and storing it in an object to cheat death" is terribly similar to a Lich's phylactery... both in intent by the writer and in the described effect.

In both universes this, by it's very definition, is an evil act. Not only because the ritual involves the murder of an innocent, but because separating the holy union of soul and body is an act against nature.


D) You discovered, during life, a secret to the universe so dark and sinister that you were willing to accept lichdom as a way of guarding it throughout eternity, and the lich ritual was somehow a lesser evil as opposed to allowing for even a chance that this dark secret be known by others someday.


While I can understand your logic, nonetheless most theologists would agree that there is no lesser evil, and to try to "fight evil with evil" is misguided and doomed to failure.

Although I think that this would make a great story, though...

"The party must find and destroy a deranged and insane Lich that was formerly a priest of a good deity in life. He went through the Lich's ritual in order to (better protect his charge/defeat a fiend/etc), only to find that he immediately lost his deity's favor and lost his sanity when confronted with the evil of his actions."

Mewtarthio
2007-02-10, 03:29 AM
I was almost certain that the only ways to be a "good" lich were if:

A) You found a way to become a lich without murdering babies or whatever it is in the standard ritual that turns you evil. The alternative race swapping rituals in the SSG come to mind.

B) You were compelled, magically or otherwise, to perform the ritual.

C) You have since atoned, and we're talking a lot of atonement. Or...

D) You discovered, during life, a secret to the universe so dark and sinister that you were willing to accept lichdom as a way of guarding it throughout eternity, and the lich ritual was somehow a lesser evil as opposed to allowing for even a chance that this dark secret be known by others someday.

I think that's pretty much it for good liches, just about any other route a la most of the easy routes turn you evil.

A may have implications that you'd rather not consider (such as every high-level spellcaster becoming a lich, regardless of alignment; the loss of the whole creepy undead feel about the lich; your PCs becoming liches; etc). B is impossible, since the ritual states that it can only be performed by a willing lich-to-be (though it's always possible that you were coerced into performing the ritual, but anyone willing to perform "unspeakably evil" acts to save his own skin is probably Evil anyway). D would probably produce a Neutral lich rather than a Good one (it's already technically possible with the Dread Necromancer, so there's nothing wrong with the concept). C is the most likely.

Jade_Tarem
2007-02-10, 02:54 PM
A may have implications that you'd rather not consider (such as every high-level spellcaster becoming a lich, regardless of alignment; the loss of the whole creepy undead feel about the lich; your PCs becoming liches; etc). B is impossible, since the ritual states that it can only be performed by a willing lich-to-be (though it's always possible that you were coerced into performing the ritual, but anyone willing to perform "unspeakably evil" acts to save his own skin is probably Evil anyway). D would probably produce a Neutral lich rather than a Good one (it's already technically possible with the Dread Necromancer, so there's nothing wrong with the concept). C is the most likely.

Good point(s).

A does indeed lose the "creepy" flavor to the lich. There are, however, alternative roleplaying possibilites. Why did they do that? Desperation to save the party, or a group or a location, for example? What did he give up to become a lich? Is he likely to change back once he has a taste of the added power?

B is possible, i'm pretty sure. I didn't read the part about how they couldn't be magically forced into it, but how about a)suggestion and b) a good but kinda cowardly wizard?

D depends on how you spend your time in lichdom, although this sort of ties in with C. If you spend your centuries researching cures for horrible diseases and donating anonymously to various orphanages, as well as using nonlethal techniques to turn away the too-curious, then chances are you wind up good in the end. Remember, alignment morphs to fit the actions of the players, not the other way around.

When I said "good" lich, I really meant "not evil baby-eating" lich... sorry for the confusion there.

Yakk
2007-02-11, 10:28 AM
Sometimes becoming a lich doesn't require a ritual. Take a 20th-level Dread Necromancer, for example. It just happens (your fluff may vary). Also, if your Dread Necro had the Tomb-Tainted Soul feat (pretty much all of them do), it's be quite easy to fluff about them being warped by their magic but not neccesarily being evil. Not good, but possibly neutral.

The innate evilness of some magic is just silly anyway. I mean, Deathwatch? Best low-level utility spell for a healer to have. But Good clerics (by the RAW) can't cast it. What the heck?

Similarly, gating in a Solar would be really useful for a high level evil cleric.

Yet the evil cleric can't do it.

The flavour text even describes it -- Deathwatch is a power granted to you by the foul powers of unlife. Just as gating in a Solar requires contact with good forces, casting Deathwatch requires contact with evil forces.


Evil or not, I think it's unlikely that they'd stay Evil for very long.

They're near-completely immortal, why should they give a damm what other people think?

I can't think of any Immortal=type being anything but Neutral and having to be heavily persuaded into doing much of anything that doesn't affect them or their interests directly. They just do what they like, not what other people like...

There is the arguement that the undead are not life. One needs life to change, while the undead -- they don't change. The lich is powerful, strong, and smart -- but is unable to truely change.

Second, placing yourself beyond the morality of all other beings is evil. If the life of innocents means nothing to you, you are evil. It is written right in the RAW.


A may have implications that you'd rather not consider (such as every high-level spellcaster becoming a lich, regardless of alignment; the loss of the whole creepy undead feel about the lich; your PCs becoming liches; etc).

Such a ritual might require hard to get at things -- like consuming the soul of an evil death god.


C) You have since atoned, and we're talking a lot of atonement. Or...

Atonement for the unspeakable evil acts of being a lich would consists, at a minimium, of revoking the benefit you gained from the unspeakably evil acts. In which case, you wouldn't be around anymore.

Imagine if your very life was supported by the brains and bodies and souls of 1000 innocent intelligent and good beings, who are living in eternal pain and suffering so you can continue to exist. Worse -- your magics are breeding them, creating new souls to torture to continue to allow yourself to move.

Every time you move your finger, another soul is forged and then damned to an eternity of infinite torture.

And that is speakable evil. Liches perform rituals of unspeakable evil to gain their eternal life.

What act could atone for that?

JellyPooga
2007-02-11, 10:52 AM
I always imagined new Liches being almost always evil (though good and neutral ones being possible), but as they get older, more and more drift towards Neutality (if they're not there already).

Why?

Because after 3 millenia of creating undead hordes and invading the local villages/towns/cities, threatening the King by kidnapping his daughter and all those other stereotypically bad-guy things to do, along with reading every book of magic and otherwise you can get your hands on to further your power...you're going to get bored of it all. You can only go for so long before asking "What's it all about then. I mean, really?".

You can try spicing up your dungeon lair with traps, spreading rumours about the vast wealth you probably have already spent on black onyx and inviting adventurers to provide you with amusement, but that only lasts so long. It's only a matter of time before the traps have custard pies in instead of spears and you are putting up signs saying "Treasure this way" and "I'm an evil Lich, come and kill me"...just for kicks. You sit there waiting for the day that some gullible fools come into your dungeon to encounter the Clown Zombies, chuckle heartily as they plunge into vats of stawberry jam and roar with laughter when they go home thinking that they've killed you for good when they've only destroyed the lump of rock you painted "My Phylactery" in pink magical runes on that causes them to turn a similar shade of pink after 24 hours.

In short, you're going to go nuts. What's the alignment of lunatics? Yep, Chaotic Neutral.

Therefore, Liches should have a listed alignment of "Usually Chaotic Neutral".

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 11:02 AM
first of all, dnd is NOT black and white. it just include those colours. blacks chaotic evil, whites lawful good, blues probably chaotic good, reds lawful evil and so on. you do not have to stick largely to your alightnment, you can take lawful in different ways. strict, honourable, law abiding, anything, but you DONT have to be all. same for chaotic.
second, yes, undead should technically count as reading of evil. while positive energy is the energy of life, negative energies the energy of death (or somin like that). and ghosts and undead, being powered by that energy, would read as it. however, that would count for an aura of a cleric of equivilant hitdice. if it were somehow good, they would show up as a good creature, not having an aura of equivalent clerical level to hitdice.
liches dont have to be evil. belive me, in the source book :magic of incarnum, there is loads worse, like necrocarnates, using the energy of tortured souls in eternal anguish that may hove not been born yet to power yourself, and defiling every corpse you come across (or make) in order to sustain that power. if you suddenly said "i need to live longer, im gonna be a lich" yes, you would be evil. you have no good intentions.
despite the phrase "the path to evil is lined with good intentions", im gonna say that a good intending lich could stay good. moving a soul does nothing to it, but the lich may develope schitzophrenia from having its mind outside its body. if the lich was suddenly decide "i need to protect my fammily/sires fammily/the fabric of space-time, but i dont trust the people to come after me, im gonna become a lich" i would say thats a chaotic act. while it is true the ends dont always justify the means, sometimes the means have nothing to do with it.

Mewtarthio
2007-02-11, 02:00 PM
first of all, dnd is NOT black and white. it just include those colours. blacks chaotic evil, whites lawful good, blues probably chaotic good, reds lawful evil and so on. you do not have to stick largely to your alightnment, you can take lawful in different ways. strict, honourable, law abiding, anything, but you DONT have to be all. same for chaotic.

A world with Angels and Demons is pretty much as black-and-white as you can get.


second, yes, undead should technically count as reading of evil. while positive energy is the energy of life, negative energies the energy of death (or somin like that). and ghosts and undead, being powered by that energy, would read as it. however, that would count for an aura of a cleric of equivilant hitdice. if it were somehow good, they would show up as a good creature, not having an aura of equivalent clerical level to hitdice.

Wait, what? The detect evil spell explicitly states that it registers undead. It's not as if Good clerics are able to rebuke Good ghosts.


liches dont have to be evil. belive me, in the source book :magic of incarnum, there is loads worse, like necrocarnates, using the energy of tortured souls in eternal anguish that may hove not been born yet to power yourself, and defiling every corpse you come across (or make) in order to sustain that power.

And the "unspeakable evil" that liches perform to get their power is better? You cannot feasibly imagine a more evil act than that?


if you suddenly said "i need to live longer, im gonna be a lich" yes, you would be evil. you have no good intentions.
despite the phrase "the path to evil is lined with good intentions", im gonna say that a good intending lich could stay good. moving a soul does nothing to it, but the lich may develope schitzophrenia from having its mind outside its body. if the lich was suddenly decide "i need to protect my fammily/sires fammily/the fabric of space-time, but i dont trust the people to come after me, im gonna become a lich" i would say thats a chaotic act. while it is true the ends dont always justify the means, sometimes the means have nothing to do with it.

Again, it's an act of "unspeakable evil." And what exactly is the point at which the "means have nothing to do with it"? I think performing acts of unspeakable evil to protect your family still makes you unspeakably evil. If you're trying to protect the fabric of spacetime, you won't immediately turn around and start pulling random threads, but you won't remain Good afterwards (And why, exactly, aren't the gods dealing with this? You could just ask one of them for immortality, if you're personally really that integral to the stability of spacetime). Plus, seriously, "I don't trust the guys to whom this will be charged in the future, so I'm gonna commit acts of unspeakable evil to make sure that I will always be the one in charge"?

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 03:32 PM
A world with Angels and Demons is pretty much as black-and-white as you can get.

there arnt just deamons and angels. deamons are tha chaotics, the ones who would just about do anything. there are devils, the ones who just might uphold a deal for personal gain, or find a mroe subtle rout. angels go into mixed categories, and are called celestials. everyone forgets law and chaos, they are just as influential. you cant have two colours when there are four sides.



Wait, what? The detect evil spell explicitly states that it registers undead. It's not as if Good clerics are able to rebuke Good ghosts.

iom sorry if i didnt explain this well enough, but i never stated it didnt register them as not being evil. i stated it would register them as evil, despite their alignment, but a detect good could register ones alighnment, althoguh it wouldnt be as strong (if the undead happened to be good). same goes for detect law, and detect chaos.



And the "unspeakable evil" that liches perform to get their power is better? You cannot feasibly imagine a more evil act than that?

to be pedantic, yes, i can feasibly imagine more evil that unspeakably, and there is no suchb thing as unspeakably evil, its just whoever is telling the tale being lazy or unimaginative. it depends if the cause outways the evil. if the evil is say, sacrifice a life using a certain poisen, call in a favour wiht someone in a high place and become the exocutioner of a condemned villen trialed to death. its NOT black and white.



Again, it's an act of "unspeakable evil." And what exactly is the point at which the "means have nothing to do with it"? I think performing acts of unspeakable evil to protect your family still makes you unspeakably evil. If you're trying to protect the fabric of spacetime, you won't immediately turn around and start pulling random threads, but you won't remain Good afterwards (And why, exactly, aren't the gods dealing with this? You could just ask one of them for immortality, if you're personally really that integral to the stability of spacetime). Plus, seriously, "I don't trust the guys to whom this will be charged in the future, so I'm gonna commit acts of unspeakable evil to make sure that I will always be the one in charge"?

i am sorry that i left out this, but i was assuming you could find someway around this. as you said, if the gods are in this, why dont you just ask a god to make you into a POSITIVE energy lich? perhaps whatever is causing the fabric in space time has restricted the gods from their worshipers, cutting offf their source of power? god are just as killable as anything else, they CAN die, they just take alot more effort to put down. if you really did want to protect your family, but didnt personaly trust the guy whose being inspected for taking up your job, you might aswell do an evil act,but for a good cause. if i was faced with the dicision, kill a child/innocent to save say... the future of an entire race of people or a large family (say 100 memebrs currently alive, still growing) i would, simply because im a rational thinkier. if i didfnt i would have the weight of all those deaths on my mind for the rest of my life. 1000 lives over a short period of time is less straining that a single incomprehending for an eternity.

kamikasei
2007-02-11, 03:55 PM
to be pedantic, yes, i can feasibly imagine more evil that unspeakably, and there is no suchb thing as unspeakably evil, its just whoever is telling the tale being lazy or unimaginative. it depends if the cause outways the evil. if the evil is say, sacrifice a life using a certain poisen, call in a favour wiht someone in a high place and become the exocutioner of a condemned villen trialed to death. its NOT black and white.

I think what Mewthario meant was that you were describing specific evil acts and saying that they were worse than what's required to become a lich. Since we don't know exactly what's required for lichdom, though, the only way to say that anything you describe is definitely worse is if it's so bad that the lich requirements can't imaginably be worse.

Also, your line about there being no unspeakable evil reminds me of a certain HP Lovecraft story called, I think, "The Unspeakable" on a related topic... you should check it out!

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 04:03 PM
I think what Mewthario meant was that you were describing specific evil acts and saying that they were worse than what's required to become a lich. Since we don't know exactly what's required for lichdom, though, the only way to say that anything you describe is definitely worse is if it's so bad that the lich requirements can't imaginably be worse.

Also, your line about there being no unspeakable evil reminds me of a certain HP Lovecraft story called, I think, "The Unspeakable" on a related topic... you should check it out!

thank you for clearing that up, i was having trouble figuring out what he was refering to. i do belive that torturing souls that havnt been born yet for the sake of a few minutes of power, then erapeating the process with yet mor souls, efven thoe dragged out of heaven, is unfathomably more evil than bargening with evil deities and extraplanar creatures, then going of to kill innocents for the poison.

i would check it out, if i knew where to find i. it sounds fun, could you give me a link or reference?

Monseigneur
2007-02-11, 04:06 PM
This topic has taken quite a bit of time to read, and really is some food for thought, but the whole argument can be solved by one word:Atonement. If a Paladin/good Cleric/some other champion of all that is right and just becomes a lich to further serve good, then said good person would think it in good sense to request their patron deity or the church thereof to cast Atonement post-lichening. Yes, I've read the spell description and it says nothing about undead.

EDIT:What? No comebacks? No corrections, no counter arguments? OR HAS YOUR MIND BEEN BLOWN!?

Seriously, I find Atonement the simplest solution to this whole Lich-Good or evil thing. Sometimes, you get stuck trying to interpret all these crazy rules from odd supplements, and you just forget about a little spell sitting in the Player's Handbook.

kamikasei
2007-02-11, 04:23 PM
thank you for clearing that up, i was having trouble figuring out what he was refering to. i do belive that torturing souls that havnt been born yet for the sake of a few minutes of power, then erapeating the process with yet mor souls, efven thoe dragged out of heaven, is unfathomably more evil than bargening with evil deities and extraplanar creatures, then going of to kill innocents for the poison.

All the SRD says is "the process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil". If some other source goes into more detail on what's involved, I guess the problem is that it's not necessarily 'canon' if you're not using that source.


i would check it out, if i knew where to find i. it sounds fun, could you give me a link or reference?

Hey, excellent - I had only mentioned it as an aside as I assumed it was still in copyright (having only seen it in a borrowed anthology), but Wikisource has the text: here (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Unnamable). It's actually "The Unnameable", and seems like a sort of response to criticism of his writing style.

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 04:24 PM
i was thinking about that spell, but i wasnt sure to its effects and im to lazy to pick up my PHB and find out.
i suppose one of their arguements might be that atonment requires your patron deity to act upon your soul and sicne your souls been seperated from your body/mutilated the deity either cant find it or is to repulsed by it to grant you the atonement. i think thats rubbish if the deities kind and forgiving, but tis just for sakes of argument



Hey, excellent - I had only mentioned it as an aside as I assumed it was still in copyright (having only seen it in a borrowed anthology), but Wikisource has the text: here (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Unnamable). It's actually "The Unnameable", and seems like a sort of response to criticism of his writing style. thanks, ill have a read of it now and i may comment in the morning. sounds interesting

Monseigneur
2007-02-11, 04:28 PM
i was thinking about that spell, but i wasnt sure to its effects and im to lazy to pick up my PHB and find out.
i suppose one of their arguements might be that atonment requires your patron deity to act upon your soul and sicne your souls been seperated from your body/mutilated the deity either cant find it or is to repulsed by it to grant you the atonement. i think thats rubbish if the deities kind and forgiving, but tis jsut for sakes of argument

I'm pretty sure that a deity can bypass any sort of binding or some such thing in a phylactery. It's a freakin' DEITY. Oh, and here's a link to the spell description:http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm It says nothing about undead.

Never mind that last part that I have handily deleted.

*waits for someone to find insane technicality*

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 04:46 PM
and I!.... I shall be that someone! (if for anything but because im enjoying this arguement)
ok, first, i didnt menti0on any binding, just that the extrememely powerful entity may not be looking in the right place for the liches soul, whcih now that ive read the atonement spell, doesnt enter into it so ignore that comment.
the REAL question is, would it count as redemption, or restore magical alignment change? your alignment has been altered by willing contact wiht evil magicks... so is it both?
anyway, on the most lickly one, redemption, the lich must freely choose to change its alignment, which, after the so called "unspeakable" deeds, and the proabbly maiming of their soul, they would probably not want to return to good.
besides, where are you gonna find a cleric willing to sacrifice xp and speak with its chosen deity? unless he's a very close friend, its gonna be ahrd to find... especially since its fith level. you cant just wlak into a town and expect their to be level 12 spellcasters, unless its a capital city of some majour state.

Monseigneur
2007-02-11, 04:58 PM
and I!.... I shall be that someone! (if for anything but because im enjoying this arguement)
ok, first, i didnt menti0on any binding, just that the extrememely powerful entity may not be looking in the right place for the liches soul, whcih now that ive read the atonement spell, doesnt enter into it so ignore that comment.
the REAL question is, would it count as redemption, or restore magical alignment change? your alignment has been altered by willing contact wiht evil magicks... so is it both?
anyway, on the most lickly one, redemption, the lich must freely choose to change its alignment, which, after the so called "unspeakable" deeds, and the proabbly maiming of their soul, they would probably not want to return to good.
besides, where are you gonna find a cleric willing to sacrifice xp and speak with its chosen deity? unless he's a very close friend, its gonna be ahrd to find... especially since its fith level. you cant just wlak into a town and expect their to be level 12 spellcasters, unless its a capital city of some majour state.

You seem to be forgetting some things.
One:I said, Plan ahead. Have the Cleric come with you.
Two:You're metagaming. An NPC Cleric wouldn't have a clue about what XP is. A cleric would just see a dedicated follower of a religion and consent to aiding the faithful.
Three:Does it matter which one it is? Same effect in the end.
Four:The whole reason this person is becoming a lich in the first place is to further the service of Good. Sounds pretty willing to undergo atonement, don't you think?

elwood j blues
2007-02-11, 05:06 PM
ok, in order,
1. fair enough, make a cleric watch you do "unspeakable" evils... or amke him wait outside... :)
2.true, a cleric would have no clue as the the xp, but a celric may not necesarrily have a deity, some follow ideals, not gods. the problem isnt in the xp cost, its in finding a cleric of high enough level.
3. yes it does matter whcih one. say your a paladin who bacame a lih to help protect your family, but you worship someone like torm, for which the ends never justify the means... he'll make you do some rediculously hard "suicide" quest befroe you get it, while if your asking a Chaotic god they'd lay back, eat another cannabis brownie and just go "yeah sure whatever, just dont do it again alright?". (i say suicide loosly, as is it possible to kill something thats not alive? let alone kill your own undead self?)
4. yeah, willing to undergo an atonement WHEN THEY WERE ALIVE. they arnt normal anymore, adn their views may have changed.
(sorry if im coming acroos as a hostile arrogant bastard, but im just voicing what otehrs may be arguing)

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-11, 10:42 PM
Actually, the insane technicality isn't very insane. It says, very specifically and very clearly, that the target has to be "living creature touched". Since a lich is no longer alive, it clearly cannot be atoned. It's like WotC actually forsaw something.

Indon
2007-02-11, 11:02 PM
Actually, the insane technicality isn't very insane. It says, very specifically and very clearly, that the target has to be "living creature touched". Since a lich is no longer alive, it clearly cannot be atoned. It's like WotC actually forsaw something.

That prompted me to glance through the SRD, and you know what? Liches (and other undead) are similarly immune to a number of other spells. It looks like a lot of the mind-effecting spells don't so much effect you as undead.

Edit: And necromancy, too, but that's more a given.

Mewtarthio
2007-02-11, 11:37 PM
Besides, the "change alignment" function of Atonement is really just an "official" manner of speeding up an alignment shift. I'd argue that you could Atone yourself to be, say, Lawful Good unless you already were pretty much Lawful Good and just wanted to quickly take that final step to purge yourself of whatever it was you used to be.

Essentially, you can only Atone back to Good as a Lich if the "unspeakable evil" you perform is not so horrible that Good becomes an impossibility.

Wehrkind
2007-02-11, 11:49 PM
Also, yes, D&D is black and white, in that it does not recognize situational ethics. Granted, ALL morality is black and white, D&D just says "X is a good person, Y is a chaotic person, Z is Lawful and Evil".

D&D morality works on a grid system. You can label the Y axis Law/Chaos and the X axis Good/Evil. So say perfect lawful good is (10,10) and perfect chaotic evil is (-10,-10). Perfect True Neutral is (0,0).
In D&D EVERY act adds or subtracts a little bit from your alignment. However, there are points where you stop being Lawfull good, and start being neutral neutral, say (5,5) for the sake of argument. At (5.1, 5.1) you are still Lawful Good, and all the effects based on that work. At (5.0,5.0) however, too bad, they suddenly don't.

That is why D&D is black and white. You either ARE an alignment, or you are not. There is no "Well, he is an alright guy, so the detect good spell shows good, but he is sometimes bad, so he also detects as neutral." He can not be two alignements at once on the scale, which is to say he can not be a "shade of grey". He is either Black, or White, or Grey.

elwood j blues
2007-02-12, 06:44 AM
ah, but what if he was an alright guy, but not good? that woiuld just be lawful neutral. alignment isnt all restricting, its a guideline to your personality, they can be interperated differently. so your saying a usually evil creature brought up in an open and good envionment would stil be evil because its "in its blood"?
that lawful neutral would show as nuetral on all but detect law, a chaotic od would show up as neutral on all but detect good and detect chaos.
i never at any point said that alignments would be confused, i mentioned that since it a fueled by evil, it will show up as evil, but since it is at heart (or at undead heart) good, it will show up as a good creature on a detect good.
you are an alignment, always, but youve completely misenturperated my argument(probably due to my lack of spelling)

Narmoth
2007-02-12, 08:14 AM
I think it's for the dm to deside, but undead are on a general basis evil in my campaigns, their aligment being more or less a prerequisite to become an inteligent undead. Exception from this is ghosts and revenants that might need some quest done for them in stead of just being killed by the players. Still, sometimes I have other good undead, but if I needed a good spellcasting undead I think I would use some kind of ghost, as I think a mage that desides he wants to become a lish has to be selfposessed and hungering for power (wich I don't view as a good thing for anyone) in the first place.

Neo
2007-02-12, 08:18 AM
There are good undead, but they're far from common. Usually its if someone is turned into a free-willed undead without their consent.

You also get things like Archliches and Baelnorns, who use it so that all their good work won't be undone when they die and to watch over their elven families/burial grounds, respectively.