PDA

View Full Version : Vampire v. Lich



Cuddly
2007-12-09, 07:27 PM
Why are vampires so much better than the lich?

If there were two casters of equal level, the one who was a vampire would be a far more dangerous foe than the lich.

Or is it because a vampire has a handful of weakness (that don't really matter when you're a caster)?

kjones
2007-12-09, 07:30 PM
Vampires are more dangerous than liches if they're at the same ECL with full caster levels. This is true.

It is also true that a human is more dangerous than an ancient wyrm dragon... if they have the same ECL in full caster levels.

The point here is the broken-ness of the LA/ECL system, not the relative power of vampires/liches...

Forrestfire
2007-12-09, 07:30 PM
accually, the lich would have the upper hand, because of the LA difference; the lich would have a castor level that was 4 higher than the Vampires.

Cuddly
2007-12-09, 07:39 PM
Actually, I'm looking at CR, not LA. LA's for player characters; liches and vampires aren't really meant to be player characters.


If you're a level 10 party, facing a level 10 vampire sorcerer would be a far deadlier encounter than facing a level 10 lich sorcerer, yet both have identical CR.

nooblade
2007-12-09, 07:40 PM
This sounds like an awfully messy court case.

While the Vampire does have more weaknesses, it also has viability as a gish and certain useful abilities (gaseous form, anyone?).

I'd say the Lich is the "undead caster lite" version that actually has the useful features associated with it and Vampirism has a little more flavor. Liches also get half the LA, but that's not all that consequential when you're the DM, I think.

Another thing to consider as a PC: the DM may opt to require the four-level prestige class as a requirement to become a Lich. I could see how a PC inflicted with Vampirism would already be in enough trouble, and thus wouldn't be forced to bother with things like that. It would be a little exciting to try and stay alive as a Vampire rather than being slain. But with an aspiring Lich, you're just like, "yeah, I want to be immortal."

Cuddly
2007-12-09, 07:58 PM
Everything a lich has, a vampire also has, the vamp tends to have it so much better. Higher ability scores (including the critical casting stats), a better slam attack (2 automatic negative levels vs. a fort save to be paralyzed), 5 free feats, and a ton of cool abilities that can be used to devastating effect vs. the players. Gaseous form, spider climb, a weaker version of polymorph, dominate at will, fast healing, con damage, and create spawn can all mimic typical lich spells, while leaving the vampire free to put different spells in its spell slots.

Far more powerful.

tyckspoon
2007-12-09, 08:04 PM
I believe the vampire has more abilities because it has a lot more lore to account for. Liches don't have a hundreds of years of stories claiming they have twenty different (and sometimes contradictory) abilities; the vampire template, if it's going to try and be mythologically accurate, has to include as many of the most popular vampiric talents as it can. Mechanically, it should probably have a higher CR adjustment than the Lich template; the benefits of the vampire template are better than those of the lich and greatly outweigh its drawbacks until characters can start nuking the vampire out of existence with Sunbeams (or hosing it down with decanters of endless holy water.)

Your typical vampire isn't necessarily more dangerous than your typical lich, however. Vampire doesn't presume the base creature is a spellcaster, lich does. While a vampiric spellcaster is more dangerous than the same spellcaster as a lich, there is no guarantee that any particular vampire is going to throw spells at you. Every lich will, which makes 'there's a lich at the bottom of the tomb' a more dangerous proposition than 'there's a vampire at the bottom of the tomb', at least until you can find out more about the vampire.

sikyon
2007-12-09, 08:08 PM
Lich is better, I'd say, with his phylacraty. Suppose that you encounter a vampire. You kill the vampire, game over. Tough fight, but you'll probably still beat it (especially if you have casters). Now if you fight a lich, you'll beat it eaisier, but it'll come back and use the ambush/suprise attack and its caster abilites to own you. Suprise/preparation and spellcasting may be on par in power, actually.

Xefas
2007-12-09, 08:10 PM
I believe this means very little considering the PCs will win either way. If the PCs die, the game is over, and it doesn't matter anyway. They HAVE to win.

This is why CR is more a guideline for the DM than a rule. The DM isn't trying to create the strongest monster for a given CR, because that's pointless, because they can do anything. The CR is just there to say "hey, don't use this, because it'll mercilessly kill your 2nd level party; it's more for 7th or 8th levels".

Cuddly
2007-12-09, 08:17 PM
I believe this means very little considering the PCs will win either way. If the PCs die, the game is over, and it doesn't matter anyway. They HAVE to win.

You kids and your 3.x D&D :smallconfused:
There's no rule that PCs must win. In fact, I frequently kill PCs, because their players metagame. Things like "that's only a goblin; skeletons can't have class levels; I've got like 60 HP!," and other forms of "the DM would never kill me" are pretty good ways to lose a character in my campaigns.


This is why CR is more a guideline for the DM than a rule. The DM isn't trying to create the strongest monster for a given CR, because that's pointless, because they can do anything. The CR is just there to say "hey, don't use this, because it'll mercilessly kill your 2nd level party; it's more for 7th or 8th levels".

But it's an obviously bad guideline. If I want to have a vampire BBEG, rather than a lich, I couldn't just look at the CRs and assume that a lich sorcerer is the same challenge as a vampire sorcerer. I'd have to realize that the only reason liches are considered more powerful than vampires, is that liches are assumed to have more (caster) levels than vampires.

Chronos
2007-12-09, 08:18 PM
Lich is obviously stronger than Vampire. After all, Lich is on the fifth level of the Earth Cave guarding an Orb; the Vampire is only on level three, and he's just guarding a stupid Ruby :smallcool: .


While a vampiric spellcaster is more dangerous than the same spellcaster as a lich, there is no guarantee that any particular vampire is going to throw spells at you. Every lich will, which makes 'there's a lich at the bottom of the tomb' a more dangerous proposition than 'there's a vampire at the bottom of the tomb', at least until you can find out more about the vampire.There's also the fact that the vampire template can be applied at lower level than the lich: Any fifth-level character can become a vampire, and depending on how you read the rules, a lower-level character might be able to, too. But every lich is at least 11th level. So not only will your average lich be from a more powerful class than the average vampire, but the average lich will have more levels in that class, too.

Balkash
2007-12-09, 08:19 PM
The only thing I'd have to say, is that eventually, Vampires get old. After a bunch of time, the BBEG Vampire, is just "oh... ya, sunbeam...". Once the players get to higher levels, the Vampire will be no sweat. The Lich, however, has the ability to, over time, become a demilich. And then the PC's show up, "Oh, the lich... wait... OH DAMN"

WrstDmEvr
2007-12-09, 08:24 PM
Lich is better, I'd say, with his phylacraty. Suppose that you encounter a vampire. You kill the vampire, game over. Tough fight, but you'll probably still beat it (especially if you have casters). Now if you fight a lich, you'll beat it eaisier, but it'll come back and use the ambush/suprise attack and its caster abilites to own you. Suprise/preparation and spellcasting may be on par in power, actually.
No, its that you wound the vampire and it goes away with gaseous form to heal, leaving behind a crippled party that it will finish off a couple rounds later.

TheElfLord
2007-12-09, 08:34 PM
Don't knock the ability to fight at any time of day outside. The Sunlight issue may not be a huge deal in a dungeon, but in dungeon light game, being able to be a viable opponent from sunup to sun down is important.

Bag_of_Holding
2007-12-09, 08:35 PM
I believe vampires have more crippling weaknesses than liches. Firstly, unable to enter a building without permission means no sneaking in for assassination. Also, since it only takes the cleric's holy symbol to keep it at bay (and it doesn't have to be the cleric who's holding the symbol), the only way that a vampire can attack a party (assuming at least one of the party members has a mirror and/or a holy symbol) is by getting them by surprise.

Their dire weakness to sunlight also poses a significant drawback, limiting the encounters to some kind of dark places or at night.

A lich however, does not have those weaknesses. It can also return from death in 1d10 days as long as the phylactery isn't destroyed. As the only way to repel a lich is to fight it to death (only to be returned after 1d10 days) or to destroy its phylactery (which would be much harder than locating a vampire's coffin, which would actually be a coffin not some obscure object).

So in conclusion:
1. A vampire is much more powerful than a lich with the same CR, yet much easier to keep it at bay as long as the party is aware of the vampire's presence
2. A lich may be less powerful than a vampire, yet it is much harder to repel and destroy for good.


Also, the organisation entry of Lich shows that a lich sometimes leads a band of vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lich.htm). I'm surprised that no-one mentioned it yet.

Gralamin
2007-12-09, 08:35 PM
The only thing I'd have to say, is that eventually, Vampires get old. After a bunch of time, the BBEG Vampire, is just "oh... ya, sunbeam...". Once the players get to higher levels, the Vampire will be no sweat. The Lich, however, has the ability to, over time, become a demilich. And then the PC's show up, "Oh, the lich... wait... OH DAMN"

Obviously you have never meet the horror that is Strahd.

Prophaniti
2007-12-09, 09:00 PM
I've always liked Liches more than Vampires, but I think that's partly an innate rebelion because so @#@$ many people like vampires, and there's so many bad shows/movies about them. The other part is the idea that becoming a Lich is difficult and dangerous, something a wizard devotes many years to researching and preparing, while becoming a vampire is more blind luck. You get bit and they decide not to 'kill' you completely. In the world I'm designing, I've always wanted to do vampires more uniquely than mainstream, definitely give them some obvious drawbacks so players won't be falling over themselves to get bitten. It's supposed to be a CURSE, dammit!:smallmad:

EDIT:

Also, the organisation entry of Lich shows that a lich sometimes leads a band of vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lich.htm). I'm surprised that no-one mentioned it yet.

This is because a Lich must be a caster, and is almost always at least a part-time Necromancer, thus he controls undead. Vampires are very powerful undead, so why wouldn't they want a few guarding their keep/tower/lair?

Cuddly
2007-12-09, 09:19 PM
I believe vampires have more crippling weaknesses than liches. Firstly, unable to enter a building without permission means no sneaking in for assassination.

Except for being able to dominate at will, and having spawn to do your bidding, as well as being able to turn into an animal and getting invited in.

Not to mention a level or two of any arcane caster gives you disguise self. And note that we are comparing casters here.


Also, since it only takes the cleric's holy symbol to keep it at bay (and it doesn't have to be the cleric who's holding the symbol), the only way that a vampire can attack a party (assuming at least one of the party members has a mirror and/or a holy symbol) is by getting them by surprise.

Actually, it just can't come within 5 feet. That doesn't mean he can't dominate the rogue, and lay down some serious magical hurt on the rest of the party, or summon a swarm of creatures to distract the party member with the garlic.


Their dire weakness to sunlight also poses a significant drawback, limiting the encounters to some kind of dark places or at night.

I'm fairly certain there's magic out there to take care of that sort of thing. Not 100% on that, though. Probably items, too.


A lich however, does not have those weaknesses. It can also return from death in 1d10 days as long as the phylactery isn't destroyed. As the only way to repel a lich is to fight it to death (only to be returned after 1d10 days) or to destroy its phylactery (which would be much harder than locating a vampire's coffin, which would actually be a coffin not some obscure object).

When a vampire hits 0 hp, he turns into gas, seeps through the floorboards, and heads back to his coffin. If he has a way to cast spells silently and stilled, he can buff himself with temp hp. Alternatively, he could hit himself with one of those spells that does negative energy damage (metamagic'd or otherwise), putting himself up to 1hp, and the fast healing begins.

And smart vampires cleverly disguise their coffins, and a caster vampire would certainly trap the crap out of one.

I mean, anything a caster lich is doing, a caster vampire will just as likely be doing; except more so, as the vampire will be smarter and wiser than the lich.


So in conclusion:
1. A vampire is much more powerful than a lich with the same CR, yet much easier to keep it at bay as long as the party is aware of the vampire's presence

Except neither a lich nor a casting vampire's real strength is in melee- it's just that it's not weak to being melee'd.


Also, the organisation entry of Lich shows that a lich sometimes leads a band of vampires (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lich.htm). I'm surprised that no-one mentioned it yet.

Which is surprising, given that a vampire is superior in virtually every way.

Xefas
2007-12-09, 09:27 PM
You kids and your 3.x D&D :smallconfused:
There's no rule that PCs must win. In fact, I frequently kill PCs, because their players metagame. Things like "that's only a goblin; skeletons can't have class levels; I've got like 60 HP!," and other forms of "the DM would never kill me" are pretty good ways to lose a character in my campaigns.


Actually, I've only started 3.5 recently. My brother got me into 2nd edition when I was in the 5th grade, and towards the end of high school, I started 3.5... not that it makes a different.

Say you kill a PC. That doesn't mean the PCs have lost. The ones still alive can continue fighting until they win. The dead PC just makes a new character, and continues on. His death meant absolutely nothing.

Now, say they don't win. Say you've made something so strong, that it kills them all.

The game is over. The campaign has ended, because everyone is dead. Everyone goes home, and the game meant nothing. The PCs MUST win, or the game ends and it doesn't matter what happened at all. This is true no matter what P&P game or edition there is.

Yes, it's a bad guideline, but it's still just a guideline, no matter how condescending you are about it. Vampires are more powerful than Liches- you know this, so just take that into account while playing. What Wizards gives as a guideline means nothing to your individual game.

Feralgeist
2007-12-09, 10:18 PM
there is a spell to help vampires against the sun. 5th level cleric spell in the forgotten realsms book lords of darkness. It's called Night's Mantle, it lasts 10 minutes per level, and the material component is rubies worth 1000 gp

Edit: the lich could just walk through a river, or into the sea. vampire loses

Bag_of_Holding
2007-12-09, 10:19 PM
Well... you could always drive a wooden stake through the vampire!

AND!! The rule doesn't really deal with how to drive that bloody (or soon to be) stake through a vampire, does it?

WrstDmEvr
2007-12-09, 10:31 PM
The problem with being a lich is that you have to be a caster to become one. You lose two caster levels to gain some special melee abilities. Oh yeah, and a +2 increase to your casting attribute. While a vampire doesn't have to be a caster, gets better melee abilities, extra feats, skill bonuses, dominate and polymorph as spell-like abilities, fast healing, and more ability increases than the lich.

Kaelik
2007-12-09, 11:09 PM
Except for being able to dominate at will, and having spawn to do your bidding, as well as being able to turn into an animal and getting invited in.

Not to mention a level or two of any arcane caster gives you disguise self. And note that we are comparing casters here.

The problem is, what if their is a reclusive mage (or lich) that spends all his time in the tower, and has golems/mindless undead do all his little things for him. He never needs to invite anyone in, as such he is completely immune to vampires. Not so to liches. (I'm not saying this makes liches better, or even equal to vampires, just saying that it is still a disadvantage.)


And smart vampires cleverly disguise their coffins, and a caster vampire would certainly trap the crap out of one.

I mean, anything a caster lich is doing, a caster vampire will just as likely be doing; except more so, as the vampire will be smarter and wiser than the lich.

The problem with Coffins versus Phylacteries is that the Coffin has to be within X distance (and technically the rules state that the only action a vampire can perform is heading towards his coffin, so their 0HP ability is different then a regular gaseous form where you could cast spells, though I would allow it.) and while that distance can be a long way, 1) The PCs can follow your trail. 2) It isn't really really far.

Sometimes it's nice to know that your phylactery is in another city, and there is exactly zero way the PCs will find it, because there is no evidence at all.


Which is surprising, given that a vampire is superior in virtually every way.

No, it was already explained. All Liches are casters, not all vampires are. That Goblin HD 5 vampire isn't anywhere near as powerful as even the weakest Lich.

Cuddly
2007-12-09, 11:14 PM
No, it was already explained. All Liches are casters, not all vampires are. That Goblin HD 5 vampire isn't anywhere near as powerful as even the weakest Lich.

A vampire caster in general, is considerably more dangerous than the lich caster, yet they have the same CRs.

Of course a level 5 warrior goblin vampire is less powerful than a level 15 human lich wizard- you're comparing apples and oranges.

But if anyone took any time to read what my first post said, they'd realize that their generalizations are pretty meaningless.

Dausuul
2007-12-09, 11:37 PM
It is one heck of a lot easier to finish off a vampire than it is to finish off a lich. Consider:

#1. The vampire's coffin must be within 9 miles of its location when it "dies." The lich's phylactery can be on another continent, or another plane of existence. Because of this, the lich can set up all kinds of fixed defenses around its phylactery; a vampire that does the same thing with its coffin has effectively trapped itself in a 9-mile-radius area. And when the PCs kill the vampire, they know they don't have far to go to find its coffin.
#2. The vampire assumes gaseous form when "killed" and has to fly back to its coffin at the less-than-spectacular speed of 20. It's not even incorporeal, so while it can seep through cracks and small holes, it can't just dive into the ground. Enterprising PCs can trap it (forcecage, anyone?). Or, if they have incorporeal allies or a way to become gaseous/incorporeal themselves, they can follow it. The lich is safe from such tricks.
#3. The vampire's special power only protects it from death by damage. If it's destroyed by a save-or-lose effect (e.g., disrupting weapon, sunbeam, sunburst, et cetera), or any other non-damage means, it dies permanently. A lich's phylactery doesn't care what you do to the lich.
#4. The vampire's weaknesses can sometimes be used against it. If you can get it into a sunlit area, it's screwed--it gets either a move action or an attack action, neither of which will let it cast a spell. Likewise, if we assume a coup de grace is sufficient to stake a vampire, all you need is a way to immobilize it for a round (be sure to have the staker delay her action until after the immobilizer's action, so that the vampire doesn't get a chance to turn gaseous). Liches have no such special weaknesses.

As far as which is deadlier in combat, if both are casters? I think it's a wash. The vampire has that handy dominate person gaze, but it's not much better than simply casting a dominate person spell, which all liches are high enough level to do. Their respective touch attacks are pretty decent; the lich's attack is a fairly vicious save-or-lose, the vampire's grants no save but only inflicts two negative levels. But they're both melee attacks, and we're talking about casters, who usually have better things to do with their standard actions. The vampire's blood drain is only usable in a grapple, and a caster who's grappling is a fool, even with the vampire's Strength bonus. The vampire's AC is three points better (+2 from Dex and it gets +6 natural versus the lich's +5), but, once again--caster. AC is not a major priority.

Liches have the edge against energy attacks, since they get total immunity to cold and electricity where the vampire only gets resistance 10. It's hard to say who's got the better DR type (bludgeoning and magic versus silver and magic), but the lich's DR is 15 where the vampire's is only 10. Children of the Night isn't going to do much at these levels.

The vampire's one real advantage is fast healing, which the lich doesn't get. But 5 hit points a round isn't that big an edge at these levels.

Ultimately, I think the lich wins because it's so much harder to put the lich down for good. The vampire's advantages simply don't synergize well with caster classes. They work much better as melee warriors or sneaky types; there's a reason why the "elite vampire" is a high-level monk. A vampire swordsage would be a scary, scary thing.

(Also note that the vampire can't drop a 1-point inflict minor wounds on itself and pop back up, nor can it have someone else do so. When the vampire returns to its coffin, it is helpless. It remains so for 1 hour, at the end of which it regains 1 hit point, ceases to be helpless, and resumes its usual rate of healing. Healing it before then will not negate its helplessness. Moreover, if we're supposing a vampire caster, it plays by the same rules as any other caster--it has to rest for 8 hours to get its spells back no matter how fast it recovers from "death.")

AslanCross
2007-12-09, 11:39 PM
Well... you could always drive a wooden stake through the vampire!

AND!! The rule doesn't really deal with how to drive that bloody (or soon to be) stake through a vampire, does it?

Yep. If your DM's willing, you could probably take the metal head off the end of a crossbow bolt or an arrow. Of course I'd probably rule that you'll have to take a penalty to aim carefully. A heart, after all, is a much smaller target than a vampire.



Driving a wooden stake through a vampire’s heart instantly slays the monster. However, it returns to life if the stake is removed, unless the body is destroyed.

It would be really funny to have a vampire caster cast heart of stone on himself, though.

"WHY ISN'T THE STAKE WORKING?!?!"

Mewtarthio
2007-12-10, 12:05 AM
Vampires are easier to permanently destroy, but that shouldn't be factored into CR. The CR is meant to represent the challenge a creature poses in a single encounter. A single encounter with either a vampire or a lich is not the task of hunting it down and keeping it dead: It's the task of defeating it in a single fight so you can get on with whatever you were doing before. Permanently ending an enemy is a good strategy that should probably net bonus xp, but it's not strictly covered by CR.

Dausuul
2007-12-10, 12:09 AM
Vampires are easier to permanently destroy, but that shouldn't be factored into CR. The CR is meant to represent the challenge a creature poses in a single encounter. A single encounter with either a vampire or a lich is not the task of hunting it down and keeping it dead: It's the task of defeating it in a single fight so you can get on with whatever you were doing before. Permanently ending an enemy is a good strategy that should probably net bonus xp, but it's not strictly covered by CR.

And it's not factored in. Vampires and liches both have a CR adjustment of +2; and neither is substantially more impressive in combat.

Guy_Whozevl
2007-12-10, 12:16 AM
The only thing I'd have to say, is that eventually, Vampires get old. After a bunch of time, the BBEG Vampire, is just "oh... ya, sunbeam...". Once the players get to higher levels, the Vampire will be no sweat. The Lich, however, has the ability to, over time, become a demilich. And then the PC's show up, "Oh, the lich... wait... OH DAMN"

Have you seen the monstrosity that is the Vampire Lord? Basically, all the sweet bonuses you apply to the Vampire's ability scores are reapplied, they get bonus HP, effectively get Divine Grace, pick up way better abilities and some useful feats (Leadership), get Wild Shape as an 11th level Druid, and overcome a majority of their major weaknesses. They also can't freaking die unless you do this overly complicated ritual involving pinning it, decapitating it, buring it, burying the ashes in consecrated ground, and the like. It can still come back to life anyway if it is removed from the consecrated ground though.
I personally believe that (barring epic levels aside-I'm looking at you Demilich) the vampire template is more versatile, as it can be applied to any class, while the lich is caster exclusive. All in all, the abilities the vampire gets are superior, such as the stat boosts and, namely, energy drain. The lich has a nifty touch attack, but a spellcaster (without extra HP from Con) shouldn't be making those touch attacks anyway. The rejuvination thing is nice, but I still think that a vampire has the lich beat in survivability. The main strength of the lich is that no matter where or when you find it, be prepared to fight a full caster (unless you meet the rare psudo-caster bard (unless its a Sublime Chord, but that's going into too many tangents:smallbiggrin: )). But, I still stand by my statement that the vampire (and pre-epic vampire lord) beats down the lich, until the epic demilich is brought in. Then, there's no contest.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-10, 12:27 AM
And it's not factored in. Vampires and liches both have a CR adjustment of +2; and neither is substantially more impressive in combat.

Yes. I'm arguing that the argument about how easy it is to kill a vampire is irrelevant.

Dausuul
2007-12-10, 12:53 AM
Yes. I'm arguing that the argument about how easy it is to kill a vampire is irrelevant.

Hmm... sorta depends on what the OP meant by "far more dangerous foe." They're about equally dangerous on the battlefield, but in the long term, the lich is a more durable and therefore more dangerous enemy.

(Of course, I just realized that the vampire has one powerful advantage over the lich with regard to their respective resurrection methods: The vampire gets to take its stuff with it, whereas the lich doesn't. And at 11th level, gear is extremely important, even for a caster. So perhaps it's a wash on that level as well.)

TheOOB
2007-12-10, 01:09 AM
Vampire has the huge problem where they decided it would be a good idea to slam with a bunch of different weaknesses, some of which are from incompadible mythologies.

Talic
2007-12-10, 01:09 AM
Level 10 Vampire sorceror vs Level 10 lich sorceror?

Vampire wins.
Then he wins again.
Then he wins again, irked that he can't find the phylactery.
Then he wins again.

Then the lich wins once, follows the vamp's gaseous form to his coffin, and destroys him utterly.

Vampires are harder to kill. True.
Liches are harder to KEEP dead.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-10, 01:23 AM
Hmm... sorta depends on what the OP meant by "far more dangerous foe." They're about equally dangerous on the battlefield, but in the long term, the lich is a more durable and therefore more dangerous enemy.

Looking back, I see that the OP actually didn't mention CR, so I'll concede that. Of course, Liches do tend to lose all their gear when you kill them, but Liches are also notoriously patient (hence the immortality) and skilled at plotting, so they'll be back to full strength by the time they cross paths with the PCs again unless the phylactery has been smashed already.

Besides, liches have access to the secret cache of Offscreen Villain Dark Matter (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OffscreenVillainDarkMatter).

TheElfLord
2007-12-10, 01:50 AM
Another thing to consider is freedom of action. Liches are self made, each Lich can pretty much do whatever he or she wants. The one way a vampire is created in RAW (ifaik) is to be at least 5th level and drained of its con by another vampire. The newly created vampire is a servant of the old unless the old one is destroyed. This is a huge crimp on freedom.

Dausuul
2007-12-10, 02:23 AM
Another thing to consider is freedom of action. Liches are self made, each Lich can pretty much do whatever he or she wants. The one way a vampire is created in RAW (ifaik) is to be at least 5th level and drained of its con by another vampire. The newly created vampire is a servant of the old unless the old one is destroyed. This is a huge crimp on freedom.

Well, presumably we're comparing to a master vampire here. Still, this brings up a good point. New vampires are created by an older, master vampire, who presumably does not want minions who might arrange his demise. So they will probably be chosen to be subservient or stupid, and these traits will remain after the old master perishes and the minions become masters in turn.

A lich, on the other hand, creates itself in its twisted, obsessive pursuit of power.

Consequently, the self-made lich is likely to reach higher levels, and also to be a more crafty foe, than the vampire who was chosen to be a slave.

Kaelik
2007-12-10, 02:32 AM
A vampire caster in general, is considerably more dangerous than the lich caster, yet they have the same CRs.

Of course a level 5 warrior goblin vampire is less powerful than a level 15 human lich wizard- you're comparing apples and oranges.

But if anyone took any time to read what my first post said, they'd realize that their generalizations are pretty meaningless.

I was only addressing why Liches keep vampire pets. You said that it doesn't make sense because vampires are stronger. I was saying that the reason liches have pet vampires is because they get lower HD and/or non-caster vampires to be their pets.

Tokiko Mima
2007-12-10, 11:21 AM
What I think makes vampires more difficult foes is that you rarely face a single vampire. Because vampires can easily create and control vampires or vampire spawn they create, a master vampire shouldn't even be encountered or spoken of. And if you're dealing with an especially wily or cagey one like Strahd, most of their weaknesses won't matter because they will have magically circumvented them long ago. Liches have to use more conventional means to assemble their evil hordes.

But then, if you've got a high enough caster level for either of them, it really doesn't matter because they're both Batmen.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-10, 11:50 AM
Well let's look at them side by side:

{table].|Lich|Vampire|Winner
AC|+5(does not stack)|+6(stacks)|Vampire
Attacks|(1)Touch (Dmg+paralysis)|(1)Slam (Dmg+Drain)|Vampire
Special Att|Fear aura|A lot|Vampire
DR|15/Blud. & magic|10/silver & magic|Lich
Immunities|Cold+Electric|Resist cold + Electric 10|Lich
Misc|Nothing|A bunch|Vampire
Stats|no contest|a bunch|Vampire
Feats|*yawn*|a ton|Vampire
Skills|a bunch!|the same as him +1|Vampire
Weaknesses|None|A bunch|Lich
In case of death...|Phylactery|Coffin|Lich[/table]

I think the vampire is fairly obviously the statistical winner. The overall winner though is... The Lich. :xykon: If you don't like it, we can discuss it again in 5,000 years.

Dausuul
2007-12-10, 01:27 PM
Well let's look at them side by side:

{table].|Lich|Vampire|Winner
AC|+5(does not stack)|+6(stacks)|Vampire
Attacks|(1)Touch (Dmg+paralysis)|(1)Slam (Dmg+Drain)|Vampire
Special Att|Fear aura|A lot|Vampire
DR|15/Blud. & magic|10/silver & magic|Lich
Immunities|Cold+Electric|Resist cold + Electric 10|Lich
Misc|Nothing|A bunch|Vampire
Stats|no contest|a bunch|Vampire
Feats|*yawn*|a ton|Vampire
Skills|a bunch!|the same as him +1|Vampire
Weaknesses|None|A bunch|Lich
In case of death...|Phylactery|Coffin|Lich[/table]

I think the vampire is fairly obviously the statistical winner. The overall winner though is... The Lich. :xykon: If you don't like it, we can discuss it again in 5,000 years.

I have to take issue with one of your assessments. Why do you rate the vampire's melee attack as better than the lich's? Let's do a little sub-comparison on them:

{table].|Lich|Vampire|Winner
Effect|Permanent paralysis|2 negative levels|Lich
Saving throw|Fort|None|Vampire
Attack type|Touch|Normal|Lich by a mile[/table]

That last one is the kicker. The vampire has to make a regular melee attack and get through armor. The lich only has to touch you. When you factor that in, and consider that we're talking about caster BAB, the odds of the vampire actually making its attack work are much reduced.

Moreover, it's a melee attack. The last thing a caster wants to be doing is slugging it out in melee for any length of time. The lich's attack is well suited to caster tactics; pick an enemy with a weak Fort save (like the enemy wizard), dart in, paralyze, withdraw before the enemy fighters smash you into bone dust. The vampire's attack, however, works best when you stack it round after round. By themselves, two negative levels don't do much. It's the cumulative effect of piling negative level on negative level that makes it hurt.

I submit that from a caster's standpoint, the lich's melee attack is substantially better than the vampire's.

sikyon
2007-12-10, 06:25 PM
I submit that from a caster's standpoint, the lich's melee attack is substantially better than the vampire's.

I submit that from a caster's standpoint, both melee attacks are irrelevant.

Old_el_Paso
2007-12-10, 06:36 PM
liches and vampires aren't really meant to be player characters.
Says who?

fillerfillerfiller

Dausuul
2007-12-10, 07:45 PM
I submit that from a caster's standpoint, both melee attacks are irrelevant.

Well, mostly. Their use would be highly situational; probably 95% of the time, the undead in question would be better off casting a spell than using either attack. Still, so far as that 5% goes, I think the lich's attack is much better.

Destro_Yersul
2007-12-11, 06:05 AM
Liches also get the cool factor. Vampires have been way overdone, and are frequently whiny, especially in pop. culture. Liches are badass incarnate, and really don't have enough said about them.

Just my 2cp...

Talic
2007-12-11, 06:17 AM
"Samir and Thok, start on the ten skeletons in the corner; I'll help you out as soon as I'm done with the one with the crown."

- Famous last words

Dausuul
2007-12-11, 09:17 AM
Liches also get the cool factor. Vampires have been way overdone, and are frequently whiny, especially in pop. culture. Liches are badass incarnate, and really don't have enough said about them.

Just my 2cp...

With any luck, Harry Potter will usher in a new era of lich villains. :smallbiggrin:

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-11, 11:02 AM
I have to take issue with one of your assessments. Why do you rate the vampire's melee attack as better than the lich's? Let's do a little sub-comparison on them:

{table].|Lich|Vampire|Winner
Effect|Permanent paralysis|2 negative levels|Lich
Saving throw|Fort|None|Vampire
Attack type|Touch|Normal|Lich by a mile[/table]

That last one is the kicker. The vampire has to make a regular melee attack and get through armor. The lich only has to touch you. When you factor that in, and consider that we're talking about caster BAB, the odds of the vampire actually making its attack work are much reduced.

Moreover, it's a melee attack. The last thing a caster wants to be doing is slugging it out in melee for any length of time. The lich's attack is well suited to caster tactics; pick an enemy with a weak Fort save (like the enemy wizard), dart in, paralyze, withdraw before the enemy fighters smash you into bone dust. The vampire's attack, however, works best when you stack it round after round. By themselves, two negative levels don't do much. It's the cumulative effect of piling negative level on negative level that makes it hurt.

I submit that from a caster's standpoint, the lich's melee attack is substantially better than the vampire's.

Don't get me wrong, I am on the Lich's side, that's what I would be if I were signing up for undeath... however, I stand by my assessment of the vampire's greater battle prowess. The negative levels will nearly always work. No save, no nothing. The Lich's paralyzing touch, while cool, is dependant on a failed Fort save and is also dependant on the character in question not having one of the 15,000 more defenses against paralysis than there are against negative levels. At the levels you would ordinarily be fighting a lich, that paralysis isn't going to do enough. Sure, I can see it as a nice add on to the Lich casting some other touch spell and adding on an "Oh by the way..." however, the vampire caster gets to do the same thing. There plenty of ways for the vamp to make his attacks touch attacks too though.

Chronos
2007-12-11, 02:44 PM
The Lich's paralyzing touch, while cool, is dependant on a failed Fort save and is also dependant on the character in question not having one of the 15,000 more defenses against paralysis than there are against negative levels.Freedom of Movement protects against paralysis, and Death Ward protects against negative levels. Is there something I'm missing? The only difference I can see is that there's a core item which grants continual Freedom of Movement, but for Death Ward, you either get limited use of it from a core item (which is still probably enough), or unlimited use from another book.

Craig1f
2007-12-11, 02:59 PM
Freedom of Movement protects against paralysis, and Death Ward protects against negative levels. Is there something I'm missing? The only difference I can see is that there's a core item which grants continual Freedom of Movement, but for Death Ward, you either get limited use of it from a core item (which is still probably enough), or unlimited use from another book.

I would argue that like most things, they're both circumstantial. But, on average, the Drain touch will work better, because there is no save, and each touch on a caster will drop his maximum spell level available by 1.

In either case, you can attempt a dispel magic to remove the defense.

Also, remove paralysis takes one standard action. Restoration takes three rounds, so it can't really be done in battle.

Dausuul
2007-12-11, 03:48 PM
Sure, I can see it as a nice add on to the Lich casting some other touch spell and adding on an "Oh by the way..." however, the vampire caster gets to do the same thing.

Actually, neither of them can do this.


There plenty of ways for the vamp to make his attacks touch attacks too though.

Such as...? Keeping in mind that the energy-drain attack is a backup weapon at best, so heavy investments in making it effective are not generally wise?

The only ways I can think of would be wraithstrike, which is generally acknowledged to be extremely broken; or using that maneuver from the ToB whose name I can't remember, which would require a couple of feats and could only be used once per encounter. Turning a normal attack into a touch attack is NOT a trivial exercise, or every melee build in the game would be doing it.


I would argue that like most things, they're both circumstantial. But, on average, the Drain touch will work better, because there is no save, and each touch on a caster will drop his maximum spell level available by 1.

But one successful lich touch on a caster will drop his maximum spell level available by ALL OF IT. That's the thing; the paralysis is less likely to take effect, yes, but if it does take effect, it's far more devastating than a couple of negative levels. If the lich has a minion or a summoned monster that follows up with a coup de grace, it's likely to be fatal.

Moreover, a clever lich will arrange to use its touch attack when the rest of the party can't see (e.g., solid fog blocking their view, or something like that). When they get past the fog, all they see is their friend's corpse. The text of the lich's touch attack specifically states that victims appear dead, so they don't know that remove paralysis would help.


Also, remove paralysis takes one standard action. Restoration takes three rounds, so it can't really be done in battle.

This is easily bypassed by picking up a scroll. Or you could just suck up the negative levels and keep on fighting. Can't so much do that with paralysis.

Sornjss Lichdom
2007-12-11, 04:49 PM
The lich wins if for no other reason than his phylactory (butchured that spelling), vampy hardly get something that cool. Not to mention, other than the dragon, a lich is the most recognisable BBEG (this might not be legitament but i think it's cool).

Worira
2007-12-11, 07:51 PM
Nah, vampires are. It's just that we get Xykon.

Chrizzt
2007-12-11, 08:18 PM
2 points I'd like to add (in favor of the vampire, I admit)
1. the sunlight vulnerability can be overcome by simplier means too. There's the alchemical substance Liquid Night (Libris Mortis) that allows the vampire to be invulnerable to sunlight for 1 hour. Means he is not limited to be cleric or to have some cleric who casts that protection spell on him. If we talk about a vampire spellcaster, he could easily craft those protection ointment himself.

2. (the following point is quite specific, I have to admit. nonetheless, here is it)
The Lich can have only one phylactery. I now of a certain (official) spell that destroys the object that is most important to the enchanted creature (I think its in the Book of Vile Darkness). Guess which item is highly likely to be of MOST importance to a lich? the phylactery. A vampire, on the other hand, can have several coffins around. He is not limited to a single one. While the destruction of a lichs phylactery does not kill him, he prevents him from his easiest way of coming back. Maybe the strong tie of a lich to his phyl can turn out to be bad for him in other ways too.

I know I know, there are, on the other hand, several spells that are especially devastating against creatures vulnerable to light, but see point 1 (again).

These points do not mean the vampire is now superior to the lich. I'm still unsure about the whole topic. But they are in favor of the bloodsucker.

Azymyth
2007-12-11, 09:34 PM
Between vampire and lich in the basic form, vampire has the edge because it has better options if it has to get into melee. Domination and Gaseous Form are both at will abilities so it would free up spell slots for more potent abilities.

The Lich's paralyze ability may generally be better than the Vampire's drain but, assuming the vamp is a caster, it can cast spells that will severely weaken the party first THEN go in and use the drain touch to not only finish the target off the vamp gets lucky but also turn a once ally into a new foe.

hylian chozo
2007-12-11, 10:26 PM
Where does it say a vampire can have multiple coffins? Also, to find the coffin or phylactery you can scry. The lich or vampire would have a massive will save of course, but, if you've "killed" them (no bonus on will save because you've met them) you can rather easily come by a possession or body part (-4 and -10 penalty on will save, respectively). Just kill them and scry repeatedly and you'll find the hiding place on the coffin or phylactery.Then teleport there. But then again, the Lich can have his phylactery on another plane (+5 to will save), and if both are casters they may have anti-scrying defenses set up. But notice that the permanency spell does not cover anti scrying spells. They would have to reapply them daily, giving an opportunity to follow them.

Kaelik
2007-12-11, 11:01 PM
Where does it say a vampire can have multiple coffins? Also, to find the coffin or phylactery you can scry. The lich or vampire would have a massive will save of course, but, if you've "killed" them (no bonus on will save because you've met them) you can rather easily come by a possession or body part (-4 and -10 penalty on will save, respectively). Just kill them and scry repeatedly and you'll find the hiding place on the coffin or phylactery.Then teleport there. But then again, the Lich can have his phylactery on another plane (+5 to will save), and if both are casters they may have anti-scrying defenses set up. But notice that the permanency spell does not cover anti scrying spells. They would have to reapply them daily, giving an opportunity to follow them.

Actually, I wonder how Sequester would work on a Phylactery. They still need to apply it once a month or so, but still.

Dausuul
2007-12-12, 12:05 AM
Between vampire and lich in the basic form, vampire has the edge because it has better options if it has to get into melee. Domination and Gaseous Form are both at will abilities so it would free up spell slots for more potent abilities.

True, but the value of spell slots for monsters is much less than for PCs. A typical combat with a monster will last 5-10 rounds. An 11th-level caster won't come anywhere near running out of spells in that time. It'll take at least 5 rounds just to burn through the 5th- and 6th-level spell slots.


The Lich's paralyze ability may generally be better than the Vampire's drain but, assuming the vamp is a caster, it can cast spells that will severely weaken the party first THEN go in and use the drain touch to not only finish the target off the vamp gets lucky but also turn a once ally into a new foe.

How will the draining touch "finish off" a target? Unless the vampire has been spamming enervation, it isn't likely to kill the target with negative levels, and the damage is not spectacular--for a Medium-size vampire, 1d6 plus Strength bonus plus 10 points from the negative levels.

The main use of negative levels is to soften up a big target for a save-or-lose spell. The vampire would be better off using it at the start of a fight... but it would be even better off casting enervation, which is a touch attack, usable at range, and has slightly better results on average.

And as for creating allies--yeah, 1d4 days after the corpse is buried. It's not like wraiths where they pop back up in 1d4 rounds. The vampire's ability to create spawn is handy, to be sure, but not directly useful in combat.

Overall, I'll concede the combat edge to the vampire on the basis of fast healing, stats, and feats. +4 Dexterity means a better AC and better ranged touch attacks, and the Improved Initiative and Lightning Reflexes feats will serve a caster well. The lich's superior touch attack, energy immunities, and damage reduction don't make up for those. Still, the advantage is not a dramatic one.


Where does it say a vampire can have multiple coffins? Also, to find the coffin or phylactery you can scry. The lich or vampire would have a massive will save of course, but, if you've "killed" them (no bonus on will save because you've met them) you can rather easily come by a possession or body part (-4 and -10 penalty on will save, respectively). Just kill them and scry repeatedly and you'll find the hiding place on the coffin or phylactery.Then teleport there. But then again, the Lich can have his phylactery on another plane (+5 to will save), and if both are casters they may have anti-scrying defenses set up. But notice that the permanency spell does not cover anti scrying spells. They would have to reapply them daily, giving an opportunity to follow them.

If I read the rules correctly, until the lich revives, either it isn't anywhere or it's at the location of its battered corpse. If you scry it, all you see is dead lich. And once it does revive--well, a bit late to scry its phylactery at that point.

(In fact, the rules don't even say that the lich revives at the location of the phylactery. It only says that the lich re-appears 1d10 days after its apparent death. Where it re-appears is up to the DM.)

Cuddly
2007-12-12, 03:36 AM
I don't think the vampire is in as bad a predicament with the coffin as it may seem- contingent teleport goes a long away; anywhere on that plane of existence, actually.

That gives the good guys 1 hour to find the vampire after it's dropped to zero. As opposed to the lich where the PCs have 1d10 days.

Coffins can be equally movable- a shrunken coffin with an extradimensional interior space, made out of adamantine, with tiny perforations in it, would serve almost as well as a phylactery.

A well disguised coffin (which, given the astronomical ability scores of an intelligent undead caster, vampire or otherwise), such things aren't entirely out of the picture.

The vampire also has an edge on minions- he gets to control just as many zombies and skeletons, as well as nigh infinite spawn and vampires. This could be quite a problem for PCs who find themselves beset by a bunch of low HD undead that drain levels and constitution.

I do concede that any sort of contingency healing still leaves the vampire unable to do anything in his coffin. Mind you, that is only an hour, while the lich is helpless for at least a day. The lich's touch attack may be more likely to land, but the negative levels will work against just about everyone (granted, if the vampire can land an attack against a plate clad fighter).

However, there should be no real discrepency in tactics of either lich or vampire- both would be equally cunning and masterful of his craft. There's no reason a 500 year old vampire, versed in the arcane arts, should be any less of a Batman than a lich, save fluff reasons (vampires embody decadence, arrogance and lust). But I could see an equally compelling case for the caster who decides to become a vampire for immorality, rather than a lich. A vampire doesn't even have to commit any soul scarring deeds to become one.

Chrizzt
2007-12-12, 04:24 AM
@hylian chozo
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20051028a
This is concerning a vampire spawn, but applies equally to fully grown vampires

[...]t's okay to ask for help with your coffin, but remember that it's your problem, not your group's. So work with your DM and try handle most business involving your coffin (or coffins) outside of game time[...]

Dausuul
2007-12-12, 08:48 AM
I don't think the vampire is in as bad a predicament with the coffin as it may seem- contingent teleport goes a long away; anywhere on that plane of existence, actually.

Fair enough. Although that means the vampire can't use his contingency for anything else, while the lich can; and this tactic only works for casters of 15th level or higher. Also, while the lich's phylactery cannot be scried, the vampire in its coffin can be. It's up to the DM whether the PCs can claim to have some of the vampire's body (in the form of blood on their weapons or the like).


The vampire also has an edge on minions- he gets to control just as many zombies and skeletons, as well as nigh infinite spawn and vampires. This could be quite a problem for PCs who find themselves beset by a bunch of low HD undead that drain levels and constitution.

But liches often come with vampire minions, which allows them to pull similar tricks.

Actually, if we're factoring in minions, you want to know what the real top dog is among the undead? It's the spectre. One spectre can glide into a big city just after sundown and start making new spectres at an exponential rate. In less than an hour, it can turn the entire city into spectres under its command. Vampires suffer all kinds of limitations on their "breeding" (burial required, takes 1d4 days, most new vampires are spawn and thus cannot themselves create more vampires), none of which apply to spectres.

Granted, the spectres suffer more limitations (being incorporeal), but they can recruit living minions to handle chores that require corporeality. And by "recruit," I mean, "threaten with having their life-force sucked out through their noses."

Cuddly
2007-12-12, 01:43 PM
Fair enough. Although that means the vampire can't use his contingency for anything else, while the lich can; and this tactic only works for casters of 15th level or higher. Also, while the lich's phylactery cannot be scried, the vampire in its coffin can be. It's up to the DM whether the PCs can claim to have some of the vampire's body (in the form of blood on their weapons or the like).

Why couldn't the vampire put some magic on his coffin, like nondetection, or a private sanctum around it?




But liches often come with vampire minions, which allows them to pull similar tricks.

This is quite true.


Actually, if we're factoring in minions, you want to know what the real top dog is among the undead? It's the spectre. One spectre can glide into a big city just after sundown and start making new spectres at an exponential rate. In less than an hour, it can turn the entire city into spectres under its command. Vampires suffer all kinds of limitations on their "breeding" (burial required, takes 1d4 days, most new vampires are spawn and thus cannot themselves create more vampires), none of which apply to spectres.

Granted, the spectres suffer more limitations (being incorporeal), but they can recruit living minions to handle chores that require corporeality. And by "recruit," I mean, "threaten with having their life-force sucked out through their noses."

Eh, but spectres lose all the abilities they had in life. I can see a wizard seeking out lichdom or vampiredom(?) for immortality, but becoming a spectre and losing everything? Eh, not so much.

Mr. Friendly
2007-12-12, 01:55 PM
Eh, but spectres lose all the abilities they had in life. I can see a wizard seeking out lichdom or vampiredom(?) for immortality, but becoming a spectre and losing everything? Eh, not so much.

Not necessarily. There is a Prestige Class in Savage Species to allow things like Spectres and Shadows and other spawned dead to regain their class abilities. So, in theory, a nice BBEG could be a WizardX/Prestige3/racialHD(CR) Spectre.

Dausuul
2007-12-12, 01:59 PM
Not necessarily. There is a Prestige Class in Savage Species to allow things like Spectres and Shadows and other spawned dead to regain their class abilities. So, in theory, a nice BBEG could be a WizardX/Prestige3/racialHD(CR) Spectre.

Besides, if you do give up your class abilities to become a spectre, you're trading them for hundreds of thousands of spectral minions. Many people might regard that as a pretty fair deal. :smallamused:

hylian chozo
2007-12-12, 05:16 PM
@hylian chozo
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20051028a
This is concerning a vampire spawn, but applies equally to fully grown vampires

[...]t's okay to ask for help with your coffin, but remember that it's your problem, not your group's. So work with your DM and try handle most business involving your coffin (or coffins) outside of game time[...]

Thanks, that didn't seem to be in the MM. Also, If the lich doesn't reform at his phylactery then where does he reform? If he just appears at the spot he was "killed" at he has a whole new set of problems.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-12, 05:47 PM
For reference, the d20srd.org quote:


An integral part of becoming a lich is creating a magic phylactery in which the character stores its life force. As a rule, the only way to get rid of a lich for sure is to destroy its phylactery. Unless its phylactery is located and destroyed, a lich reappears 1d10 days after its apparent death.

Note that it doesn't say anything about how the lich exists in the meantime or where it reappears. It's popular to assume that it spends 1d10 days regenerating in front of the phylactery, but it's just as common to assume it spends 1d10 days transforming the nearest corpse into a suitable vessel. Heck, it's even possible to read it as "The lich is back on his feet in an hour, and tracks down the party in 1d10 days" (for certain definitions of "reappears"), or even "the lich looks dead, but gets back up in 1d10 days." The wording is also ambiguous as to whether or not the lich is affected by the destruction of the phylactery. I think that was all intentional, to let the DMs decide for themselves how liches will be run (just like the process of becoming a lich is simply described as "unspeakably evil" with no further details).

Chrizzt
2007-12-12, 05:52 PM
2nd edition had a detailed description of the process of becoming a liche... and it was really evil.. contained some tasks that leave QUITE SOME SCARS on your soul.. heck, you even had to pass a heavy "fort" save (don't now the second edition equivalent of the fort save in this case.. maybe against death?) in order to become a lich. If you fail.. well, all the work to brew the lich-concoction wasted... as well as your life...

tyckspoon
2007-12-12, 06:05 PM
2nd edition had a detailed description of the process of becoming a liche... and it was really evil.. contained some tasks that leave QUITE SOME SCARS on your soul.. heck, you even had to pass a heavy "fort" save (don't now the second edition equivalent of the fort save in this case.. maybe against death?) in order to become a lich. If you fail.. well, all the work to brew the lich-concoction wasted... as well as your life...

System Shock roll, probably. Percent roll based on Con, if you failed it you died. You had to roll one just about any time there was a massive change made to your body- you did one when being Raised, if you got Polymorphed, I think when you got turned back to flesh after being petrified.. 2nd Ed had a lot of things that would kill you for having the temerity to not want to stay in a basic humanoid body.

Chrizzt
2007-12-12, 06:12 PM
System Shock roll sounds decent. I guess that's it. Hm... pity that I do not remember the book the lich transformation process was in.

Worira
2007-12-12, 07:34 PM
Where does it say a vampire can have multiple coffins? Also, to find the coffin or phylactery you can scry. The lich or vampire would have a massive will save of course, but, if you've "killed" them (no bonus on will save because you've met them) you can rather easily come by a possession or body part (-4 and -10 penalty on will save, respectively). Just kill them and scry repeatedly and you'll find the hiding place on the coffin or phylactery.Then teleport there. But then again, the Lich can have his phylactery on another plane (+5 to will save), and if both are casters they may have anti-scrying defenses set up. But notice that the permanency spell does not cover anti scrying spells. They would have to reapply them daily, giving an opportunity to follow them.

Private sanctum can be permanency'd. Finding a smart lich's phylactery is pretty much impossible: check out these (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-652718) topics (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=847958)