Quote from: IMLegend;448787Well then, please regail us with your myriad of preferred methods of achieving immortality. You know, the ones that have all the advantages and none of the drawbacks of undeath. By all means, enlighten us.

It depends on the version of D&D, but all of them have better alternatives than something where a high-level character can point at you and turn you to dust.

In general, resurrection spells (combined with contingency spells), wishes, longevity potions, etc. all combine to mean that someone can have a very very long lifespan indeed, with zero risk of accidental or violent death being permanent.

In some levels of D&D you can become a god just by basically getting high enough in level.
In RC D&D, you can become a god by following one of four particular recipes; which are hard but by no means so hard that becoming a lich looks better by comparison.

I look at the fact that I've had lots of players over the years who like to be "bad guy" PCs and whatnot, but NOT ONE has ever intentionally wanted to become any kind of undead, as a sign that people in general would have little reason to want to become such a thing.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditIt depends on the version of D&D, but all of them have better alternatives than something where a high-level character can point at you and turn you to dust.

Really?

Quote from: AD&D 1st PHBDisintegrate
Level: 6
This spell causes matter to vanish. It will affect even matter (or energy) of a magical nature, such as Bigby's Forceful Hand, but not a globe of invulnerability or an anti-magic shell. Disintegration is instantaneous, and its effects are permanent. Any living thing can be affected, even undead, and non-living matter... Creatures, and magical material with a saving throw, which successfully save versus the spell are not affected.

Please, do enlighten us. Just what are these alternatives?

Quote from: RPGPundit;448857In RC D&D, you can become a god by following one of four particular recipes; which are hard but by no means so hard that becoming a lich looks better by comparison.

Then basically you're asking us how lichdom would make sense in a world run with Mentzer/RC D&D where a character might get to level 36 and become a god, since these particular rules (and paths to godhood) actually do not exist in any other version of the game.

Well, I imagine that many, many adventurers die on their way to level 36. If that doesn't happen in your games, then maybe that's your answer right there - maybe you're just too soft on your players. Lichdom would then represent a shortcut for the coward or the ignorant who would want to grab POWER NOW!!1! You know, like the bad guys of classic fantasy movies.

Quote from: RPGPundit;448857In general, resurrection spells (combined with contingency spells), wishes, longevity potions, etc. all combine to mean that someone can have a very very long lifespan indeed, with zero risk of accidental or violent death being permanent.

All these things are basically stretches of the spells described in the PHB and magic items described in the DMG, because none actually give you godhood/immortality as described. Based on the description of the wish spell, for instance, I would actually actively search for a loophole in your exact phrasing of the (poorly considered) wish. Combinations of spells might result in unpredictable side effects, system shock rolls and the like. Longevity brews might become increasingly addictive and cease to work. In other words, you won't get your way to godhood by just gaming spells and magic items at my table. You can make your way to such a level of power in the campaign, but that'd be a major achievement that be worked out throughout the game, not just a matter of picking the right spells and combos with the rules.

Spite.
As people in real life choose to become suicide bombers my credibility isn't strained by imaginary magical people choosing to become undead.

To Explore Space
Nutrition, respiration and hydration not a problem; immunity to radiation and cold; lifespan that facilitates space travel.

Quote from: RPGPundit;448857...
In some levels of D&D you can become a god just by basically getting high enough in level.
In RC D&D, you can become a god by following one of four particular recipes; which are hard but by no means so hard that becoming a lich looks better by comparison.
...

Didn't the fifth path to immortality, Sphere Entropy, start with becoming undead?

And I believe the paths to immortality also required the assistance/patronage of the immortals.  I do remember reading in a supplement someplace that a magic-user (Alphaks?) had been rejected by the Sphere of Energy so he instead became a lich supplicant of Entropy.

But that path was verboten to PCs.

Religious observance - ie worshipping a God of undeath. Only the dead are truly pure.

No other alternative being open to achieve immortality and a mighty drive to accomplish it.

Campaign considerations. (see above)

Tragic circumstances. (maybe see above)

So, basically, character driven concerns rather than rules based ones.

Quote from: RPGPundit;448857...
In general, resurrection spells (combined with contingency spells), wishes, longevity potions, etc. all combine to mean that someone can have a very very long lifespan indeed, with zero risk of accidental or violent death being permanent.
...

I was always pretty generous when it came to extending the shelf-life of player-characters. Though, I did make them work for resurrection.

I seem to recall quite a few alternatives to undeath suggested in supplements. My favorite being found in an early edition of Dungeon. Magic paints that when used to create a portrait gave the subject un-dieing youth. Very Dorian Gray.

When Monster Manual II came out, everyone wanted to be a shade.

Also, at least in AD&D, the undead could not progress through levels.

Pundit seems to conveniently ignore the possibility that just as mortal players can use various magic items to extend their lives, maybe, just maybe, that 27th level lich found the time over the centuries to create a magic item or two that nullifies the major disadvantages of undeath.

In all bar Menzer D&D, the path to godhood is all but non existant.  There may be ways, but becomming a lich is much easier. Not to mentiont he power up.  No need to eat, sleep or breath, immune to any number of attacks. If we are talking 3.5 the powerup is huge.  Forget the fact the phylactury makes you pretty much unkillable, you get massive boosts to AC, HP and key ability scores like intelligence, charisma and wisdom, something all serious spell casters always lust after.

Then there is the roleplaying aspect. Regardless of mechanistic reasons, maybe its a cool roleplaying choice.  In the current PF campaign I'm playing in one of the characters has embraced lichdom (yes, he worships a god of death).

Immortal Wizards wear pointy hats.  Liches wear iron crowns.  I'd go with Lich.

Quote from: RPGPundit;448857I look at the fact that I've had lots of players over the years who like to be "bad guy" PCs and whatnot, but NOT ONE has ever intentionally wanted to become any kind of undead, as a sign that people in general would have little reason to want to become such a thing.

RPGPundit

I noticed this in my games too (which have tended to be evil character friendly). Many sought mundane paths to power, but I think only one ever tried to become undead (in this case a lich if I remember).

I've always assumed this was for one of two reasons. The first is simply metagaming. By becoming a lich, they would potentially be turned into an NPC or at the least rupture the party somehow. The second is that its like you say, people wouldn't really want to become an undead abomination just as a matter of human nature. Even evil people might draw the line at becoming undead.

I like to focus on the horrific elements of the condition. The unnatural wrongness of the undead, the cold grave-worm flesh of the vampire, the tragic hubris of the lich. The spooky stuff.

Most of the undead in my fantasy games are also morbidly deranged. I modeled my liches on famous lunatics from fact and fiction, e.g., Dr. Jacob Freudstein, Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb and Enriqueta Martí. Even without options for life extension undeath would be a path only the insane or deluded would embrace. Decidedly not a sexy character option.

But that's just my trip.

Quote from: Benoist;448861Then basically you're asking us how lichdom would make sense in a world run with Mentzer/RC D&D where a character might get to level 36 and become a god, since these particular rules (and paths to godhood) actually do not exist in any other version of the game.

I did mention other editions; while the RC gives fixed and explicit paths to godhood, most of the others imply that you can become a divine being, if not have explicit mechanics governing it (I'm pretty sure I remember 3e having lots of divine level beings around; I don't know if 4e does... yet).

QuoteWell, I imagine that many, many adventurers die on their way to level 36. If that doesn't happen in your games, then maybe that's your answer right there - maybe you're just too soft on your players.

Sure, plenty of adventurers die... 99% of them between levels 1-5 or so.  After that, Resurrection abounds, unless you're changing the default rules of the game.

QuoteLichdom would then represent a shortcut for the coward or the ignorant who would want to grab POWER NOW!!1! You know, like the bad guys of classic fantasy movies.

Sure, and I could kind of see that with vampirism; non-powerful types getting immortality of a sort combined with a big power boost.  But to be a Lich you have to already be a pretty high-level wizard, and Liches are usually presented as being incredibly clever; regardless of how EEEVIL he is, why would a high-level wizard (barring being some kind of fanatical worshiper of a god of undeath) choose to become a lich when it actually represents, at best, a lateral move in the scale of power and survivability?

As for the Disintegration spell, you get to save against that; and anti-magic, whereas fuck all protects you from most anti-undead measures.

QuoteBased on the description of the wish spell, for instance, I would actually actively search for a loophole in your exact phrasing of the (poorly considered) wish.

Sure, if you're one of those dick GMs who wants to make Wish go from being the  most powerful effect in the game into one of the most useless ones.

QuoteCombinations of spells might result in unpredictable side effects, system shock rolls and the like. Longevity brews might become increasingly addictive and cease to work. In other words, you won't get your way to godhood by just gaming spells and magic items at my table. You can make your way to such a level of power in the campaign, but that'd be a major achievement that be worked out throughout the game, not just a matter of picking the right spells and combos with the rules.

Maybe so, but then you're dealing with the subject of a different thread: "houserules for making undeath seem more advantageous" or something along those lines.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;449343Sure, if you're one of those dick GMs who wants to make Wish go from being the  most powerful effect in the game into one of the most useless ones.

It's a question of interpreting the wish literally, as to protect integrity of the game and/or the game world from being wrecked by a spell. Of course dickish DMs will be dicks about it, like everything else. But actually interpreting the wish in ways that enhance the game instead of providing an instant "win" button is the any DM's purview.

"Greedy desires will usually end in disasters for the wisher." - Limited Wish spell description, AD&D PHB, p. 88.

"Regardless of what is wished for, the exact terminology of the wish spell is likely to be carried through. (This discretionary power of the referee is necessary in order to maintain game balance. As wishing another character dead would be grossly unfair, for example, your DM might well advance the spell caster to a future period where the object is no longer alive, i.e. putting the wishing character out of the campaign.)" - Wish spell description, AD&D PHB, p. 94.

Wish is a powerful spell, and it should remain so. But it is also dangerous to use it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;449343Maybe so, but then you're dealing with the subject of a different thread: "houserules for making undeath seem more advantageous" or something along those lines.

RPGPundit

I don't call that "fixing." I call that DMing.

Quote from: RPGPundit;449343I did mention other editions; while the RC gives fixed and explicit paths to godhood, most of the others imply that you can become a divine being, if not have explicit mechanics governing it (I'm pretty sure I remember 3e having lots of divine level beings around; I don't know if 4e does... yet).

There is a world of difference between fixed and explicit paths to godhood and the implication that it is vaguely possible.

For example, 1e's Deities & Demigods suggests that if a mortal fits some loose but high criteria of power, and already has a religion around him as a mortal, and is a loyal and favored servant of an existing god, the mortal may, if the god so decides, be sent on a series of quests, with which, if the god is pleased, may choose to elect the mortal to a lesser position in the celestial bureaucracy, so to speak, after a certain amount of faithful and loyal servitude, the god may then choose to sponsor the mortal into divinity.

So it could happen, but whether it does is almost entirely out of the mortals's control; it's not something he can actively undertake of his own will. As the powerful wizard nears his mortal end, he may come to think that, despite all his achievements, no, he is not going to get the holy phone call saying report to the nearest cloud for apotheosis after all. Whereas becoming a Lich is seemingly something he can set out to do and can accomplish himself as long as he doesn't fuck up the ritual itself or something like that.

Quote from: Benoist;448861Combinations of spells might result in unpredictable side effects, system shock rolls and the like. Longevity brews might become increasingly addictive and cease to work. In other words, you won't get your way to godhood by just gaming spells and magic items at my table. You can make your way to such a level of power in the campaign, but that'd be a major achievement that be worked out throughout the game, not just a matter of picking the right spells and combos with the rules.

Quote from: RPGPundit;449343Maybe so, but then you're dealing with the subject of a different thread: "houserules for making undeath seem more advantageous" or something along those lines.

Not necessarily houseruling, though - looking at 1e again, if you take the longevity potion, for each one you drink, there is a 1% cumulative chance that it will fail to work and undo the effects of all the previous potions. So even if you've lived centuries on potions, eventually undeath would prove safer than the risk of all those centuries catching up to you after one drink too many. This is just one example, but  I do not think it unreasonable to contest the position of "when in doubt, assume living forever is an easy and reliable proposition." If your campaign is set up to make living immortality or divine ascension just as easy and as widely available as becoming undead, I would not expect many undead, but that is not saying much.

The broader issue I see here is that the question arises from how much a GM takes the printed game rules to make strong implications about the function of the game world. For my part, I do not; I tend view the rules as a convenience to aid the ability of the players to play a game in that world. If emulation of the game world is the goal, no set of rules will do that perfectly (part of the genius of having a live GM), and myself, I can deal with allowing the setting as it is presented to trump what the system has to say about the setting, understanding the system used as a compromise to keep the game rolling.

Quote from: Benoist;449401It's a question of interpreting the wish literally, as to protect integrity of the game and/or the game world from being wrecked by a spell. Of course dickish DMs will be dicks about it, like everything else. But actually interpreting the wish in ways that enhance the game instead of providing an instant "win" button is the any DM's purview.

Yeah, the advice you quoted is stupid.  There are far better ways of going about this, namely being clear about what a Wish can and cannot do.  It would be better, in fact, to just say "nothing happens" than to intentionally twist around every little detail of a wish to give some horrific opposite result.  It would be much better, in fact, to just not have a Wish spell at all if that's your opinion on it.
Unless you're dealing with a CURSED ring or scroll or wand or whatever of Wishing, the Wish spell should be able to actually be the most powerful spell in the game.  And whatever limits you want to place on it should be in the form of creating strictures and guidelines, not in the form of turning the spell into an opportunity to headfuck with your players.

RPGPundit