So, why is Vecna referred to as an "archlich" in the Vecna dossier? Is it simply down to whoever named the stat block being unaware of how the term "archlich" is seemingly commonly used?
A few items to consider and just realize that "It is complicated". First, between the Monstrous Manual of 1993 pg.223, and Monsters of Faerun of 2001 pg.90 the definition of an Archlich:
-An archlich is a term used interchangeably to refer to either a lich who is non-evil, or an exceptionally powerful lich of any alignment.
-The term archlich is used to refer to those rare few liches who do not possess an evil alignment. **(At least one lich has been Lawful Good.)** Archliches are typically humans who have undertaken lichdom with noble goals, or against their own will. Their number may include clerics or bards as often as wizards, although many good-aligned deities will reject a servant who becomes a lich.
That said, imagine the moral dilemma of embracing evil and/or vile powers in order to accomplish noble goals. However, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is a paradox for sure. The only good lich I can even fathom would be a creature that had Lichdom thrusted upon them as a curse.
A few items to consider and just realize that "It is complicated". First, between the Monstrous Manual of 1993 pg.223, and Monsters of Faerun of 2001 pg.90 the definition of an Archlich:
-An archlich is a term used interchangeably to refer to either a lich who is non-evil, or an exceptionally powerful lich of any alignment.
-The term archlich is used to refer to those rare few liches who do not possess an evil alignment. **(At least one lich has been Lawful Good.)** Archliches are typically humans who have undertaken lichdom with noble goals, or against their own will. Their number may include clerics or bards as often as wizards, although many good-aligned deities will reject a servant who becomes a lich.
That said, imagine the moral dilemma of embracing evil and/or vile powers in order to accomplish noble goals. However, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is a paradox for sure. The only good lich I can even fathom would be a creature that had Lichdom thrusted upon them as a curse.
Thanks for the clarification. I'm somewhat new to D&D (first played 4 years ago) so I'm not hugely aware of the contents of sourcebooks from older editions. Kind of weird that the term "archlich" refers to two almost completely opposite creatures.
Yes archlich is used as both... normally as the "non-evil" liches.
I guess that with vecna, they wanted to name him as something "bigger"or "better" than a simple lich... so archlich. (There are demiliches, but thats a different evolution)
As for a version of lich for non-evil guys... there are the Baelnorns, basically Elf-only liches... lore wise is completely different but is almost the same thing.
There is some Forgotten Realms, and I believe only Forgotten Realms, lore that not exclusively reserves archlich for "good liches." However, Vecna being called one and other D&D uses of the word Archlich pretty clearly follow the English and other language convention where "arch" means a rank above similarly designated: bishop and archbishop, duke and archduke, lich and arch lich.
As for demiliches, "demi-" here, as it does elsewhere, is prefixed to denote "partial" or "lesser magnitude", so the relationship between demilich, lich, and archlich is really more easily clarified by just looking at how the parts of the words function in the English language more than a lore dive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I, personally, never heard of that specific "good aligned lich" definition until now.
Looking at the sources in the wiki above, they seem to go back to some AD&D Spelljammer source book called "Lost Ships" from 1990, and have been mainly fleshed out in the 3E and 3.5E ForgottenRealms lore (so something, I skipped completely).
My first reaction to Archlich would just be: an exceptionally powerful and old lich.
There is some Forgotten Realms, and I believe only Forgotten Realms, lore that not exclusively reserves archlich for "good liches." However, Vecna being called one and other D&D uses of the word Archlich pretty clearly follow the English and other language convention where "arch" means a rank above similarly designated: bishop and archbishop, duke and archduke, lich and arch lich.
As for demiliches, "demi-" here, as it does elsewhere, is prefixed to denote "partial" or "lesser magnitude", so the relationship between demilich, lich, and archlich is really more easily clarified by just looking at how the parts of the words function in the English language more than a lore dive.
Nope, that's not right. Demiliches are explicitly a further evolution of the lich into a form defined more by raw power than physical limitations, just to further confuse things.
There is some Forgotten Realms, and I believe only Forgotten Realms, lore that not exclusively reserves archlich for "good liches." However, Vecna being called one and other D&D uses of the word Archlich pretty clearly follow the English and other language convention where "arch" means a rank above similarly designated: bishop and archbishop, duke and archduke, lich and arch lich.
As for demiliches, "demi-" here, as it does elsewhere, is prefixed to denote "partial" or "lesser magnitude", so the relationship between demilich, lich, and archlich is really more easily clarified by just looking at how the parts of the words function in the English language more than a lore dive.
Nope, that's not right. Demiliches are explicitly a further evolution of the lich into a form defined more by raw power than physical limitations, just to further confuse things.
However Demiliches are weaker than regular liches. It's weird.
Woof, explaining why mechanics don't reflect the lore is above my pay grade. I have no idea what the number crunchers were thinking fully 90% of the time.
Actually, that's kind of relevant to your original question: it's generally always best to assume that when it comes to official content, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. When the books feel right, that's fine, but when they feel wrong, throw them out the window. Always trust your gut and do what's best for your table.
Present lore in the MM demilich again reflects common sense use of demi in modern English, likely (re?)aligned as part of the natural language philosophy behind 5e
The immortality granted to a lich lasts only as long as it feeds mortal souls to its phylactery. If it falters or fails in that task, its bones turn to dust until only its skull remains. This “demilich” contains only a fragment of the lich’s malevolent life force — just enough so that if it is disturbed, these remains rise into the air and assume a wraithlike form. The skull then emits a terrifying howl that can slay the weak-hearted and leave others trembling with fear. Left alone, it sinks back down and returns to the empty peace of its existence.
Few liches seek to become demiliches, for it means an end to the existence they hoped to preserve by becoming undead. However, time can erode the lich’s reason and memory, causing it to retreat into its ancient tomb and forget to feed on souls. The spells it once knew fade from its mind, and it no longer channels the arcane energy it wielded as a lich. However, even as a mere skull it remains a deadly and vexing enemy.
The Forgotten Realms wiki article asserting strong Demiliches exclusively consists entirely of citations from one D&D work, the Epic Level Handbook for 3E. It's a shame, because it looks like there's a bibliography of a few other instances in other editions describing the Demilich, but none of them are used as reference in the text.
I think a better wiki article is probably the Ravensloft wiki, if it was better sourced than its current stub form:
Strictly speaking, there are two types of demiliches. One kind was a lich that forgot or failed to feed enough souls to its phylactery and became a demilich. The other kind was a lich that tried to become one on purpose like Acererak, who inserted eye gems in his eye sockets that would drain the souls of those who touched them.
I think most, especially new, DMs likely find the demilich-lich-archlich chain much more accessible than whatever malapropism conventions may have been used in the Forgotten Realms.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Present lore in the MM demilich again reflects common sense use of demi in modern English, likely (re?)aligned as part of the natural language philosophy behind 5e
The Forgotten Realms wiki article asserting strong Demiliches exclusively consists entirely of citations from one D&D work, the Epic Level Handbook for 3E. It's a shame, because it looks like there's a bibliography of a few other instances in other editions describing the Demilich, but none of them are used as reference in the text.
I think most, especially new, DMs likely find the demilich-lich-archlich chain much more accessible than whatever malapropism conventions may have been used in the Forgotten Realms.
Ah, now I see what deadPan_c meant.
The history of the demilich is well documented, and predates the Forgotten Realms by close to a decade. The D&D5 Monster Manual, which you have linked, despite its nonsense stat block specifically references Acererak's superior demilich form (as a "variant," I guess?), which originated from the setting-agnostic module Tomb of Horrors, printed in 1978 -- about as original a source as you can get in D&D. The monster description from the module was reprinted in the Monster Manual II (1983) as an upgrade to the lich from the Monster Manual (1977).
A quick Googling resolves the source problem on the Forgotten Realms Wiki:
I can't find a source for a D&D4 demilich, but it is worth noting that the D&D4 archlich was an Epic Destiny available to PCs in Arcane Power (2009), and still represented a good lich: https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Archlich
All of this nonsense about liches needing to consume souls or 'degrade' into a demilich is brand new as of D&D5. It might be easier to understand, and it is certainly official, but it is pretty weak tea and certainly not classic D&D lore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
J Great Wyrm Moonstone Dungeon Master
The time of the ORC has come. No OGL without irrevocability; no OGL with 'authorized version' language. #openDND
Practice, practice, practice • Respect the rules; don't memorize them • Be merciless, not cruel • Don't let the dice run the game for you
Present lore in the MM demilich again reflects common sense use of demi in modern English, likely (re?)aligned as part of the natural language philosophy behind 5e
The Forgotten Realms wiki article asserting strong Demiliches exclusively consists entirely of citations from one D&D work, the Epic Level Handbook for 3E. It's a shame, because it looks like there's a bibliography of a few other instances in other editions describing the Demilich, but none of them are used as reference in the text.
I think most, especially new, DMs likely find the demilich-lich-archlich chain much more accessible than whatever malapropism conventions may have been used in the Forgotten Realms.
Ah, now I see what deadPan_c meant.
The history of the demilich is well documented, and predates the Forgotten Realms by close to a decade. The D&D5 Monster Manual, which you have linked, despite its nonsense stat block specifically references Acererak's superior demilich form (as a "variant," I guess?), which originated from the setting-agnostic module Tomb of Horrors, printed in 1978 -- about as original a source as you can get in D&D. The monster description from the module was reprinted in the Monster Manual II (1983) as an upgrade to the lich from the Monster Manual (1977).
A quick Googling resolves the source problem on the Forgotten Realms Wiki:
I can't find a source for a D&D4 demilich, but it is worth noting that the D&D4 archlich was an Epic Destiny available to PCs in Arcane Power (2009), and still represented a good lich: https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Archlich
All of this nonsense about liches needing to consume souls or 'degrade' into a demilich is brand new as of D&D5. It might be easier to understand, and it is certainly official, but it is pretty weak tea and certainly not classic D&D lore.
Probably just using the tomb of horrors ploy to gain power as just a source of "nourishment"... They do change the lore of things every edition...
Present lore in the MM demilich again reflects common sense use of demi in modern English, likely (re?)aligned as part of the natural language philosophy behind 5e
The Forgotten Realms wiki article asserting strong Demiliches exclusively consists entirely of citations from one D&D work, the Epic Level Handbook for 3E. It's a shame, because it looks like there's a bibliography of a few other instances in other editions describing the Demilich, but none of them are used as reference in the text.
I think most, especially new, DMs likely find the demilich-lich-archlich chain much more accessible than whatever malapropism conventions may have been used in the Forgotten Realms.
Ah, now I see what deadPan_c meant.
The history of the demilich is well documented, and predates the Forgotten Realms by close to a decade. The D&D5 Monster Manual, which you have linked, despite its nonsense stat block specifically references Acererak's superior demilich form (as a "variant," I guess?), which originated from the setting-agnostic module Tomb of Horrors, printed in 1978 -- about as original a source as you can get in D&D. The monster description from the module was reprinted in the Monster Manual II (1983) as an upgrade to the lich from the Monster Manual (1977).
A quick Googling resolves the source problem on the Forgotten Realms Wiki:
I can't find a source for a D&D4 demilich, but it is worth noting that the D&D4 archlich was an Epic Destiny available to PCs in Arcane Power (2009), and still represented a good lich: https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Archlich
All of this nonsense about liches needing to consume souls or 'degrade' into a demilich is brand new as of D&D5. It might be easier to understand, and it is certainly official, but it is pretty weak tea and certainly not classic D&D lore.
Probably just using the tomb of horrors ploy to gain power as just a source of "nourishment"... They do change the lore of things every edition...
Eh, I'd chalk it up to the Spellplague ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
After spending some time looking up notable Archlichs and Lichs and noticed a general trend.
Lalthene Moonstar – A devoted follower of Selune, she sought undeath for more time to bring her brother to Justice. He is a follower of Shar. She tries to be noble, but her path to get there is evil.
Bandaerl- Is an Archlich with no lore or backstory, who guards the Tomb of an Ancient Dwarf, King Melair who was entombed in Undermountain. Sounds like a mindless guard with a neutral alignment.
Renwick Caradoon – Died in the Second Troll War, but somehow came back to life as an Archlich not sure how. Apparently he helped found an Order of Paladins that serve Tyr. But he is entombed and probably stuck guarding the tomb. Not a lot of lore to explain how he was turned into a lich.
Rhaugilath the Ageless – A old wizard of the Netherese, and the prior Lich-King of Orbedal. He was so powerful, that apparently he was beaten into servitude by a standard Lich, Larloch the Shadow King. Supposedly Rhaugilath is Lawful Good, however there is no lore and what caused his decision to become a lich.
Lady Saharel – She became an Archlich after the fall of Netheril after she sacrificed herself to destroy to the evil wizard Manshoon. But her appearances are that of a haunting ghost.
The good liches are not like the other liches. And no 2 liches are really alike. Sometimes making the lich good was from the result of lazy writing, because there is no back story. There are some that are made as servants, but even they have differences in abilities and how they were made. The real testament of the AD&D lich is that no 2 are alike. They all became liches in different ways, and most of the good ones are usually incorporeal ghosts, or Good people who are willing to embrace evil in order to fight evil. I think the reason that WoTC is so confusing on liches is on purpose. To illustrate that there is no one way to create a lich, and that each one has unique beginnings, unique powers, and unique weaknesses. What one lich requires to live and to maintain their power, is not the same requirements to the next.
**In my opinion**. An evil wizard, bard, or cleric that wants immortality for a goal will choose lichdom in order to reach their goal. Most good characters will find other means to reach their goals like demi-godhood, or making pacts with beings that can grant those powers and abilities.
Undead Nature. A demilich doesn’t require air, food, drink, or sleep. So great is a demilich’s will to survive that it always has the maximum number of hit points for its Hit Dice, instead of average hit points.
Yes archlich is used as both... normally as the "non-evil" liches.
I guess that with vecna, they wanted to name him as something "bigger"or "better" than a simple lich... so archlich. (There are demiliches, but thats a different evolution)
As for a version of lich for non-evil guys... there are the Baelnorns, basically Elf-only liches... lore wise is completely different but is almost the same thing.
They could have just called him a demigod since he basically is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
According to the (fandom) Forgotten Realms wiki, archliches "were a type of lich that was good and noble, both in life and undeath". (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Archlich)
So, why is Vecna referred to as an "archlich" in the Vecna dossier? Is it simply down to whoever named the stat block being unaware of how the term "archlich" is seemingly commonly used?
[REDACTED]
A few items to consider and just realize that "It is complicated". First, between the Monstrous Manual of 1993 pg.223, and Monsters of Faerun of 2001 pg.90 the definition of an Archlich:
-An archlich is a term used interchangeably to refer to either a lich who is non-evil, or an exceptionally powerful lich of any alignment.
-The term archlich is used to refer to those rare few liches who do not possess an evil alignment. **(At least one lich has been Lawful Good.)** Archliches are typically humans who have undertaken lichdom with noble goals, or against their own will. Their number may include clerics or bards as often as wizards, although many good-aligned deities will reject a servant who becomes a lich.
That said, imagine the moral dilemma of embracing evil and/or vile powers in order to accomplish noble goals. However, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is a paradox for sure. The only good lich I can even fathom would be a creature that had Lichdom thrusted upon them as a curse.
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
Thanks for the clarification. I'm somewhat new to D&D (first played 4 years ago) so I'm not hugely aware of the contents of sourcebooks from older editions. Kind of weird that the term "archlich" refers to two almost completely opposite creatures.
[REDACTED]
Yes archlich is used as both... normally as the "non-evil" liches.
I guess that with vecna, they wanted to name him as something "bigger"or "better" than a simple lich... so archlich. (There are demiliches, but thats a different evolution)
As for a version of lich for non-evil guys... there are the Baelnorns, basically Elf-only liches... lore wise is completely different but is almost the same thing.
There is some Forgotten Realms, and I believe only Forgotten Realms, lore that not exclusively reserves archlich for "good liches." However, Vecna being called one and other D&D uses of the word Archlich pretty clearly follow the English and other language convention where "arch" means a rank above similarly designated: bishop and archbishop, duke and archduke, lich and arch lich.
As for demiliches, "demi-" here, as it does elsewhere, is prefixed to denote "partial" or "lesser magnitude", so the relationship between demilich, lich, and archlich is really more easily clarified by just looking at how the parts of the words function in the English language more than a lore dive.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I, personally, never heard of that specific "good aligned lich" definition until now.
Looking at the sources in the wiki above, they seem to go back to some AD&D Spelljammer source book called "Lost Ships" from 1990, and have been mainly fleshed out in the 3E and 3.5E ForgottenRealms lore (so something, I skipped completely).
My first reaction to Archlich would just be: an exceptionally powerful and old lich.
Nope, that's not right. Demiliches are explicitly a further evolution of the lich into a form defined more by raw power than physical limitations, just to further confuse things.
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Demilich
Archlich is admittedly a weird naming choice for "good lich," but the lore is what the lore is, and the lore for liches is weird.
J
Great Wyrm Moonstone Dungeon Master
The time of the ORC has come. No OGL without irrevocability; no OGL with 'authorized version' language. #openDND
Practice, practice, practice • Respect the rules; don't memorize them • Be merciless, not cruel • Don't let the dice run the game for you
However Demiliches are weaker than regular liches. It's weird.
[REDACTED]
Woof, explaining why mechanics don't reflect the lore is above my pay grade. I have no idea what the number crunchers were thinking fully 90% of the time.
Actually, that's kind of relevant to your original question: it's generally always best to assume that when it comes to official content, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. When the books feel right, that's fine, but when they feel wrong, throw them out the window. Always trust your gut and do what's best for your table.
J
Great Wyrm Moonstone Dungeon Master
The time of the ORC has come. No OGL without irrevocability; no OGL with 'authorized version' language. #openDND
Practice, practice, practice • Respect the rules; don't memorize them • Be merciless, not cruel • Don't let the dice run the game for you
Present lore in the MM demilich again reflects common sense use of demi in modern English, likely (re?)aligned as part of the natural language philosophy behind 5e
The Forgotten Realms wiki article asserting strong Demiliches exclusively consists entirely of citations from one D&D work, the Epic Level Handbook for 3E. It's a shame, because it looks like there's a bibliography of a few other instances in other editions describing the Demilich, but none of them are used as reference in the text.
I think a better wiki article is probably the Ravensloft wiki, if it was better sourced than its current stub form:
I think most, especially new, DMs likely find the demilich-lich-archlich chain much more accessible than whatever malapropism conventions may have been used in the Forgotten Realms.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Ah, now I see what deadPan_c meant.
The history of the demilich is well documented, and predates the Forgotten Realms by close to a decade. The D&D5 Monster Manual, which you have linked, despite its nonsense stat block specifically references Acererak's superior demilich form (as a "variant," I guess?), which originated from the setting-agnostic module Tomb of Horrors, printed in 1978 -- about as original a source as you can get in D&D. The monster description from the module was reprinted in the Monster Manual II (1983) as an upgrade to the lich from the Monster Manual (1977).
A quick Googling resolves the source problem on the Forgotten Realms Wiki:
The text regarding liches and more powerful demiliches from the relevant core AD&D2 sources (note also the blurb about good archliches at the bottom): http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51567
From the 3rd Edition SRD (if you're not familiar with D&D3 terminology, the relevant bit is that a lich is a template with a +4 level adjustment, and the demilich is a template only a lich can take that grants an additional +6 level adjustment, for a total of +10):
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lich.htm
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/monsters/demilich.htm
I can't find a source for a D&D4 demilich, but it is worth noting that the D&D4 archlich was an Epic Destiny available to PCs in Arcane Power (2009), and still represented a good lich: https://dnd4.fandom.com/wiki/Archlich
All of this nonsense about liches needing to consume souls or 'degrade' into a demilich is brand new as of D&D5. It might be easier to understand, and it is certainly official, but it is pretty weak tea and certainly not classic D&D lore.
J
Great Wyrm Moonstone Dungeon Master
The time of the ORC has come. No OGL without irrevocability; no OGL with 'authorized version' language. #openDND
Practice, practice, practice • Respect the rules; don't memorize them • Be merciless, not cruel • Don't let the dice run the game for you
Probably just using the tomb of horrors ploy to gain power as just a source of "nourishment"... They do change the lore of things every edition...
Eh, I'd chalk it up to the Spellplague ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[REDACTED]
After spending some time looking up notable Archlichs and Lichs and noticed a general trend.
Lalthene Moonstar – A devoted follower of Selune, she sought undeath for more time to bring her brother to Justice. He is a follower of Shar. She tries to be noble, but her path to get there is evil.
Bandaerl- Is an Archlich with no lore or backstory, who guards the Tomb of an Ancient Dwarf, King Melair who was entombed in Undermountain. Sounds like a mindless guard with a neutral alignment.
Renwick Caradoon – Died in the Second Troll War, but somehow came back to life as an Archlich not sure how. Apparently he helped found an Order of Paladins that serve Tyr. But he is entombed and probably stuck guarding the tomb. Not a lot of lore to explain how he was turned into a lich.
Rhaugilath the Ageless – A old wizard of the Netherese, and the prior Lich-King of Orbedal. He was so powerful, that apparently he was beaten into servitude by a standard Lich, Larloch the Shadow King. Supposedly Rhaugilath is Lawful Good, however there is no lore and what caused his decision to become a lich.
Lady Saharel – She became an Archlich after the fall of Netheril after she sacrificed herself to destroy to the evil wizard Manshoon. But her appearances are that of a haunting ghost.
The good liches are not like the other liches. And no 2 liches are really alike. Sometimes making the lich good was from the result of lazy writing, because there is no back story. There are some that are made as servants, but even they have differences in abilities and how they were made. The real testament of the AD&D lich is that no 2 are alike. They all became liches in different ways, and most of the good ones are usually incorporeal ghosts, or Good people who are willing to embrace evil in order to fight evil. I think the reason that WoTC is so confusing on liches is on purpose. To illustrate that there is no one way to create a lich, and that each one has unique beginnings, unique powers, and unique weaknesses. What one lich requires to live and to maintain their power, is not the same requirements to the next.
**In my opinion**. An evil wizard, bard, or cleric that wants immortality for a goal will choose lichdom in order to reach their goal. Most good characters will find other means to reach their goals like demi-godhood, or making pacts with beings that can grant those powers and abilities.
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
Acererak from Tomb of Annihilation is an archlich, and he’s definitely evil.
I really like D&D, especially Ravenloft, Exandria and the Upside Down from Stranger Things. My pronouns are she/they (genderfae).
I bet this often gets overlooked.
They could have just called him a demigod since he basically is.
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
Sure... but maybe its from before he became a demigod or lesser god.
Why do Forgotten realms rules apply when Vecna doesn't originate in the Forgotten realms?
He`s from Greyhawk originally, isn`t he?
For that matter, Acererak isn`t from Faerun originally either.
Questions for the ages. :)
J
Great Wyrm Moonstone Dungeon Master
The time of the ORC has come. No OGL without irrevocability; no OGL with 'authorized version' language. #openDND
Practice, practice, practice • Respect the rules; don't memorize them • Be merciless, not cruel • Don't let the dice run the game for you