Liches and mase of disruption?

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 9:07 am

Are liches considered undead when it comes to the special abilities of the mase of disruption? I ask this because I have seen it work as advertised on other undead, but never had it really help me with a lich.

Thomas · Post by **Thomas** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 9:18 am

The mace does work on liches, but remember that they have a monstrously low set of saving throws so it's more frequent that one actually beats them old bones to dust before they fall before the special powers of the mace.

Radek · Post by **Radek** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 9:59 am

Another question about liches: False Dawn does not seem to work as expected with liches. As undeads the should not save but they seem to do. Are liches not-so-undead creatures???

Elenias Nal'nair · Post by **Elenias Nal'nair** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 11:02 am

A lich is in every respect considered undead. There's even a chance for turning him with a priest (at least a little one) according to the 2nd edition undead table. Though I think in BG2 they made them unturnable.
But it might be that there are different categories of liches as well...

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 12:10 pm

If I recall correctly (don't have my books here at work), liches classify as "specials", so it takes a very high level priest (and even higher level paladin) to turn them. Even then there is no chance of destroying them on a turn.

I can understand why BI would have made them unturnable. Technically the minute you attack them after turning them, the turning is broken and they attack as normal.

With the "anti-undead" spells, liches have high magic resistances and low saves, so it's easy to shrug off that kind of stuff.

As far as a demi-lich, forget it. I'm surprised Kangaxx (or whatever his name is) even goes down at all.

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 12:32 pm

You need to post more exciting topics wave, you're not getting much of a response....

*ducks blow from mace*

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 12:35 pm

I am sure my mace of disruption works fine on Nazgul, foul.

Oh, and:

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 1:04 pm

And the sudden, heavy silence draped itself across the crowd of onlookers as they stood, transfixed by a sight so unearthly, so obviously a manifestation of evil incarnate, some indeed lost the ability to pull away their stare, to move, and some even to breathe.

The Foul Dwimmerlaik indeed was here: and Hell with him-- towering above the crowd-silhouetted against the blood-red sky his form evoked awe, terror and, against all will, adulation. Wisdom sat on his helm, and power in his mighty frame-- But lo! As the eyes of the crowd watched on, the true meaning of his appearance became clear---for dangling from his massive fist was the battered and bloodied form of a man, though little evidence remained to tell the tale of his life. Only shattered bones and twisted limbs testaments to some trivial offence he had committed against the ineffable will of the Witch-King. Cries lifted from the crowd as the Foul Dwimmerlaik raised his prey on high and hurtled him down upon a spike in the ground, nay! It was a mace that had been thrust deep into the ground! As the body lay quivering, gravity dragging it inexorably down, a last feeble sound escaped his lips “Lord Foul! Forgive me! Never shall I use emoticons again, nor critique thy topics!”.

The Witch-King of Angmar lifted his head in mocking laughter that rang loud and clear like the tolling of a giant, cracked iron bell---“No, indeed thou shall not- evermore!”

------------------
I will drive my enemies before me, take their souls and listen to the lamentation of their women echo in the Cavern of Khazad-dum.

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 1:11 pm

LOL, holder of one of the nine. You shall have this round, not only because I laugh, but because I need to run down to the lab. A question for the witch king in the meantime: how many of the Nazgul where women? You above all should know.

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 1:41 pm

Mmm. This fact is unknown, though all of the nine servants were assumed to be men. Only Khamul is named, and in many references "men" are implied. We know that three of the Nazgul were Numenoreans (at least). Sometimes "Gothmog" is mentioned by a confused reader, and some like to quote Ichabod in his anecote about the tenth rider: the elven female.

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 1:52 pm

LOL at myself. I can't verify my source! Suffice it to say, I recollect that there was at least one or perhaps two. The source was not JRR himself but rather a more recent history or bestiary endorsed by Christopher. My apologies for not making sure I had the answer prior to posing the question- this is the first I have heard of a tenth rider please elaborate.

haha

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:12 pm

Well, there are always so many corporations and people trying to capitalize on the success and name of Tolkien, you have to look carefully at exactly what you're reading. I'd be interested to hear where you read it, let me know if you remember.
The "tenth rider" was rumored to be one on many different things, one of which was Eowyn (since she was wounded deeply by the Nazgul, when she died, she returned to life as the tenth wraith), one was Arwen Evenstar, etc, etc. There is no evidence of this however, and is utterly without foundation (I only mentioned it because I thought you might be referring to it). I wonder what the One Ring would be in Baldur's Gate?

The One Ring
Abilities:
Unlimited Improved Invisibility
Unlimited Mass Mental Domination (saving throws at negative 15)
AC bonus of -8
Negative Plane vision and travel
85% Magic Resistance
-4 to casting time
8 extra spells of each level
Improved Wizard Eye
Farsight
Doom
Fear
Chaos

Anything I'm forgetting?

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:22 pm

yeh, leave it on for too long and become a wraith. The only reason the names and history of the wringraiths is taken seriously is because Christopher Tolkien seemed to approve. As for a tenth wraith- that would involve another ring, and of course there were "9 for mortal men doomed to die, one for the dark lord on his dark throne." We know much of the 3, but I have not heard a satisfactory account of the 7.

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:30 pm

"...seven for the dwarf-lords in their halls of stone."

These were ancient lords of dwarven lands ranging from Moria through the Iron Hills and beyond, who were swayed by the voice of the dark lord who promised to reveal great secrets of metal-smithing and the creation of beautiful objects out of precious metals and stones, and baleful knowledge of the ages. They were currupted, and created many fell arms for the armies of Barad-Dur.

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:40 pm

Where are the wearers? 4 of the 7 were rumored to have been devoured by dragons (stupid dwarves) but that still leaves 3 rings of power on stubby little axe wielding fingers.

Drakron Du´Dark · Post by **Drakron Du´Dark** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:44 pm

well let me get my "Lord of the rings"

3 for the elves lords (uncorrupted as long that they are not wear when the One is being use by its master)
7 for the Dwarfs Kings (responsible for the greed that destroyed the Dwarven kingdowns, now in possetion of Sauron, there is a referece in "the hobbit" about one of then)
9 for the mortal mens (well we know all about those, dont we)
And 1 to control all.
By the way my books are tranlated to my mother language.

------------------
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not became a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss gazes into you..."
Friedrich Nietzsche

FoulDwimmerlaik · Post by **FoulDwimmerlaik** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 2:45 pm

Sauron recovered the other three, what happened to their owners you can guess...

Bordin_Steelaxe · Post by **Bordin_Steelaxe** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 4:09 pm

Originally posted by Elenias Nal'nair:
A lich is in every respect considered undead. There's even a chance for turning him with a priest (at least a little one) according to the 2nd edition undead table. Though I think in BG2 they made them unturnable.
But it might be that there are different categories of liches as well...

I turned the lich in the "cult of the unseeig eye quest sewer". I used a lvl 14 or 15, d@mn what was his name, the one who wants to be a member of the radiant heart.. ARGHN! Too long ago since I played that game the last time

. Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that u CAN turn liches, but it's preeeetty tough

------------------
Bordin Steelaxe
The greatest Dwarf in history!... with an axe of steel
D@mn UBB codes!

Elenias Nal'nair · Post by **Elenias Nal'nair** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 7:27 pm

Well the topic of liches seems to be no longer of interest, so I'll stick to the spin-off-topic of Nazgûl:
You're right, at least one of them is female. Her name is Adûnaphel. As for the others here are they in order by rank and power:

Witch-King Of Angmar
Khamûl The Easterling
Dwar Of Waw
Indûr Dawndeath
Akhôrahil
Hoarmûrath Of Dír
Adûnaphel
Ren The Unclean
Ûvatha The Horseman

btw. Gothmog was the king of the trolls and lieutenant of Morgul in the time of LotRV

Waverly · Post by **Waverly** » Fri Jan 19, 2001 7:56 pm

Thanks so much, Elenias. Is this the source originating with Christopher Tolkien that I was thinking of, or from somewhere else?