PDA

View Full Version : Archlich LA



bekeleven
2014-08-24, 12:35 AM
Reasonably certain the Archlich (MoF 90) has no listed LA. If that's the case, then what would be fair for it?

It's basically a lich with the following changes:


Good alignment
Turning immunity (still vulnerable to rebuke/command)
Animate dead at will, CL=Character level.
Turn Undead or Rebuke Undead (Lich's choice) 3+Cha/Day
3/Day, can project for 1 hour up to 1 mile from its body. Send incorporeal body, can see and go ethereal at will, can speak normally and move through all barriers including force effects. Doesn't technically use the word "incorporeal," only "wraithlike," but I assume it would interact similarly with AMF.
Water Walk at will.


If I missed a listed LA, please tell me where I can find it.

Basic Lich is LA+4. How do you rate Archliches?

Yogibear41
2014-08-24, 03:43 AM
Same as the normal lich, its basically a variant lich.

It gains a few abilities, but I also think it loses several abilities the normal lich has such as the paralysis.

Probably would have been made a deathless instead of an undead, if the deathless type existed at that time. And being Deathless is generally considered being worse than being undead. If you make it deathless, might even be able to drop the LA down to +3, but don't quote me on that.

bekeleven
2014-08-24, 04:10 AM
I don't see where they lose any abilities. I looked specifically for paralyzing touch.

That said, the RAW is marginally ambiguous over whether they get projection. It even states that they get all normal lich abilities plus animate dead as a spell-like, turning immunity, water walk, and metamagic fuelturn undead.

Inevitability
2014-08-24, 05:34 AM
RAW they'd gain 0 LA, because if a template doesn't state it changes something (like the base creature's LA) it doesn't.

And as the lich is already over LA-ed, keeping it at +4 seems more than enough.

AMFV
2014-08-24, 11:33 AM
RAW they'd gain 0 LA, because if a template doesn't state it changes something (like the base creature's LA) it doesn't.

And as the lich is already over LA-ed, keeping it at +4 seems more than enough.

Actually an unstated LA is considered LA: -. Or not for player consumption.

Sir Garanok
2014-08-24, 11:59 AM
If you wanna go by the book no LA change is needed.

But if you judge that some of the extra abilities give too much of an edge on a current situation,
you can increase LA by 1.

Inevitability
2014-08-24, 12:51 PM
Actually an unstated LA is considered LA: -. Or not for player consumption.

Actually not. It is a common mistake to think it is. Look at the rules for Improving Monsters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm).


Generally, if a template does not cause a change to a certain statistic, that entry is missing from the template description. For clarity, the entry for a statistic or attribute that is not changed is sometimes given as "Same as the base creature."

So, we got a human with +0 LA. Now we add the archlich template, which has no listed LA, and thus does not change the human's LA. LA remains +0.

Zanos
2014-08-24, 12:54 PM
Regular Lich isn't worth +4 by a longshot. It also already costs 128k GP and a handful of experience and a feat tax to even craft the phylactery, and the bonuses the templates give you are primarily defensive, which would largely be supplanted by having more spell slots to buff yourself with anyway.

It'd still call it +2 at best. Almost nothing will ever be as good as 2 levels of casting, though.

HunterOfJello
2014-08-24, 01:21 PM
Actually not. It is a common mistake to think it is. Look at the rules for Improving Monsters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm).


It's not a mistake. It's a commonly known fact.


"If a creature in the Monster Manual doesn’t have a level adjustment, this means we don’t recommend using it as either a player character or a cohort. The dryad is a good example; she’s connected to her tree and as such has very limited mobility. Mindless or low-Intelligence creatures also make undesirable cohorts."

If you see a listing of LA: - or no level adjustment listed at all, then that race or template is not designed for player characters and should not be used by them.

If you see "LA: - (cohort)" then that means it is alright for you to have a cohort (animal companion, leadership, improved familiar) as one of these, but not have a player character play one.

WhamBamSam
2014-08-24, 02:00 PM
It's not a mistake. It's a commonly known fact.



If you see a listing of LA: - or no level adjustment listed at all, then that race or template is not designed for player characters and should not be used by them.

If you see "LA: - (cohort)" then that means it is alright for you to have a cohort (animal companion, leadership, improved familiar) as one of these, but not have a player character play one.That quote refers to creatures, not to templates. A base monster with no listed LA absolutely is LA --. However, the rules for applying templates (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#readingATemplate) which Dire Stirge also linked clearly state the following.


A template’s description provides a set of instructions for altering an existing creature, known as the base creature. The changes that a template might cause to each line of a creature’s statistics block are discussed below. Generally, if a template does not cause a change to a certain statistic, that entry is missing from the template description. For clarity, the entry for a statistic or attribute that is not changed is sometimes given as "Same as the base creature."

As for what LA the Archlich should have, the Lich LA is almost entirely based on how difficult it makes it for you to die, so it should be priced at whatever you think the Lich template is worth, maybe 1 LA higher, since Turn Undead is pretty nice, but probably not. Since a Lich with a Cleric dip is unarguably better than an Archlich without one.

AMFV
2014-08-24, 02:04 PM
Actually not. It is a common mistake to think it is. Look at the rules for Improving Monsters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm).



So, we got a human with +0 LA. Now we add the archlich template, which has no listed LA, and thus does not change the human's LA. LA remains +0.

That's already been addressed briefly. But what's also worth noting is that almost no 3.0 Templates include LA even ones that clearly should, Half-Golem for example. And Archlich is 3.0, so it might be worth ruling something in any case it's not reasonable to expect that a DM at an actual table would allow it for 0 LA, even if the rules were that way, and I'm fairly sure that they're not. It wouldn't be a reasonable expectation.

Sith_Happens
2014-08-24, 02:13 PM
As for what LA the Archlich should have, the Lich LA is almost entirely based on how difficult it makes it for you to die, so it should be priced at whatever you think the Lich template is worth, maybe 1 LA higher, since Turn Undead is pretty nice, but probably not. Since a Lich with a Cleric dip is unarguably better than an Archlich without one.

I don't know, Animate Dead at-will is pretty sweet if you ask me.

WhamBamSam
2014-08-24, 02:27 PM
That's already been addressed briefly. But what's also worth noting is that almost no 3.0 Templates include LA even ones that clearly should, Half-Golem for example. And Archlich is 3.0, so it might be worth ruling something in any case it's not reasonable to expect that a DM at an actual table would allow it for 0 LA, even if the rules were that way, and I'm fairly sure that they're not. It wouldn't be a reasonable expectation.That's a fair point. Some 3.0 templates could fall under the "may need updating" clause that covers things like the Wilderness Lore and Scry skills not existing. Was LA even a thing back in 2001?

On the other hand, there is an official update document (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) to Magic of Faerun from 2006 which makes no mention of doing anything with the archlich.


I don't know, Animate Dead at-will is pretty sweet if you ask me.True. And at CL=character level, it actually gives you a pretty nice sized and almost infinitely replaceable undead army to control.

So a more accurate assessment would be that an Archlich should be somewhere in between what's fair for a lich and what's fair for a vampire.

AMFV
2014-08-24, 02:47 PM
That's a fair point. Some 3.0 templates could fall under the "may need updating" clause that covers things like the Wilderness Lore and Scry skills not existing. Was LA even a thing back in 2001?

On the other hand, there is an official update document (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) to Magic of Faerun from 2006 which makes no mention of doing anything with the archlich.

It's worth noting that the same happened with every other template that was updated to 3.5. Such as a again the half-golem. LA wasn't consistently a thing back then, no. I imagine that it would be more likely to be excluded out of hand if you try to run it with no LA. RAW is all well and good, but you have to occasionally look at what people at a reasonable table are going to do, and allow a Lich style template with no LA is not a very likely answer.