Ok Veeky Forums so here me out on this

>no phylactery hunts

Rather than being apathetic and static, I kinda like the idea that the brain one would be cold and emotionless and calculating, while the one with a soul but no physical brain would be wild and reckless and emotional.

...stealing that.

Why not? In such a setting, I could easily see phylacteries being a thing. Maybe once you rise as a lich, you feel a strong compulsion to build a phylactery and you'll die for keeps if you don't complete it in time.

Or maybe any item can be a phylactery, and it's either an item of intense sentimental value, or it's the last item you touched, or maybe the last magical item you activated...?

That's more of a mummy thing isn't it?
Usually a wizard planning to become a Lich orchestrates a plan to ascend to Lichdom through research, a Cleric wishing to be a Mummy dies, gets mummified and hopes for the best.

Actually on that note...
If you were an evil Cleric who became a mummy, your brain would have already been removed as part of the mummification process before you became a mummy and thus would not be undead tissue. You could turn that into a Brain in a Jar no problem, right?

I guess you'd have to ask your followers to be gentle when they remove it through your nose.

I have two sorts of undead.
Undead (vampires, wights, revenants, etc.) and Animate Dead (zombies, skeletons, ghouls, etc.).

Undead are "naturally" occurring, and were formerly living (the became undead instead of dying).
They're the tried and true Undead -> Depression analogy, but with feral undertones.
If/When they completely give in to their id, they degenerate into Animate Dead (typically ghouls).

Animate Dead were formerly dead (they became undead after dying).
They are essentially just automatons kept animate by their original soul (which is sealed/bound to them).

Liches are Animate Dead. Sophisticated automata, but automata none the less.
You can hold a conversation with one, but it just parses syntax. They don't experience anything at all.
A lich's phylactery is a magic item that creates a lich every so often.
Liches imitate growth or learning by adjusting (or altering) their phylactery, then refreshing themselves.
A lich only has one soul to animate itself, so old liches are destroyed when their phylactery creates a new one.
The lich itself is a sort of corpse possessing ghost.
Liches aren't made to have a long shelf. They degrade badly if not replaced, but they can and do exist without phylacteries.
The first thing they do is often to pattern a new phylactery after themself, but by the time they finish they're quite far gone.
Incidentally, most ancient liches have long since gone insane.

I don't have a Brain in a Jar equivalent, but if I did it would probably be an Undead. Either way,
>Do you think you could have two copies of Darkdeath von Evilberk?
Darkdeath von Evilberk only has the one soul to go around. So no.
He'd need to splurge on something like Clone or Mind Seed.

Minor complaints, but if something merely parses syntax and the like rather than actually thinking can it really go insane? It might degenerate to the point where it comes across as insane, but if it doesn't think it's not sane or insane.

If liches modify their phylacteries but aren't really sentient anymore, how do they know what to do? Do they just make random changes? Do they simply optimize using knowledge the individual gained while they were still sentient so they'll be better suited to fighting whatever they most recently fought?

Also, if you can't get a duplicate soul through a brain in a jar, why would you be able to get one via Clone or the like? Personally I like the 'only one has a soul' thing proposed by some other user where one behaves more like a person and the other is a fairly static duplicate that has trouble changing or learning because they lack that spark the soul adds.

That said, I like the overall idea of living people -> intelligent (relatively speaking) undead -> mindless undead and I might steal some version of it for myself.

So you think a Brain in a Jar requires the soul of the person it's from to become sentient?

Is that true for all intelligent undead?

>It might degenerate to the point where it comes across as insane, but if it doesn't think it's not sane or insane.
Point taken.
>If liches modify their phylacteries but aren't really sentient anymore, how do they know what to do?
Limited short term memory. Liches have more than most Animate Dead, but not much.
>why would you be able to get one via Clone or the like?
Clone steals a fresh soul from the unborn, Mind Seed repurposes an existing soul, etc.

>of the person it's from
At the point where the body is missing it's soul, it's dead. You can't make Undead from corpses, so yes.
>Is that true for all intelligent undead?
The "intelligenmt" undead are all Undead. And that's true for all Undead.

Animate Dead can be made with unrelated souls, but the process is crude and tricky.
If you even bother you'd be limited to simpler varieties of Animate Dead.

My own take on undead.

My setting, all bodies require souls to move them. Living people have their souls in them, then their soul passes on when they die.

"Natural" undead happen when a soul becomes corrupted somehow, usually from exposure to negative energy, but not always the case. In this case, the body lives, but the soul is infected like a disease. Some undead like vampires and zombies can pass that disease onto others, corrupting their souls as well. The pain causes most people to go insane, though one or two vampires manage to retain their sanity eventually. They're still hunted on sight because getting rid of vampirism is probably the one thing the setting's 4 gods all agree on(3 of the gods hate each other, the 4th is the strongest and spends most of their time keeping the other 3 from doing anything stupid).

Unnatural undead are the opposite. The soul is fine, but the body is dead or tainted in some way. Most of the time this comes from a soul being extracted from a body, then being shoved into a corpse. This is also quite painful as you can imagine, and most people go insane from this as well. Even those that don't, if the soul doesn't have control enchantments on it, it's basically a free-willed undead. The body can be modified in some ways to create other types of undead: claws, sharper teeth, polymorphed in some way, etc.

In all cases, undead are hated because souls pass onto their afterlife(and as a result, their god) on death, and the gods feel the souls are their right to have, and anyone keeping them stuck in the world of the living needs to go. Though the gods can be petty, and sometimes harbor undead and necromancers if they think the souls they're trapping would go to the other gods.

True Liches are theoretically impossible, since the corpse needs a soul actually in it to control it. There's a single Lich in the setting, but no one has any idea how he did it, and he's not willing to share his secrets anytime soon.

>you can't make undead from corpses

I'm not sure I understand. Isn't that exactly what the spell Animate Dead does?

"This spell turns the bones or bodies of dead creatures into undead skeletons or zombies that follow your spoken commands."

Not everyone plays D&D.

Which system has both a Brain in a Jar but a lack of spells that raise the dead?

The OP linked to the Wizard's archive, so it's obvious that the context of this discussion is D&D.

I'm categorizing two sorts of undead.
But I made the mistake of naming one of the categories "Undead," which is a hassle in general discussions.

undead -> the word
Undead -> the category

>Undead [...] were formerly living (they became undead instead of dying)
You become Undead if you die while cursed with Undeath.
You can be cursed to Undeath well in advance, but it usually happens as part of *how* you're killed.
>Animate Dead were formerly dead (they became undead after dying)
People can turn your corpse into a magic corpse puppet whenever they want.

I have no idea where you're getting that, but that's fine for your game. What about revenants? They still even have their original personalities, but they aren't vampires.

Why stop there herr doktor? Reference please, Baron Heinreich Von Helsingrad, whose immortality has stretched beyond death so many times that it exceeds inconceivability!

After almost ascending to godhood with an implanted Vril organ (don't ask, nobody else knows either), the good Baron re-emerged postmortem as a brain in a jar strapped to a very dangerous series of robotic bodies.

However, after destroying the brain, he just, comes back. in another, newer body. often decades apart with progressively more insane mad scientific schemes.

Where does that leave the spell Awaken Undead, which can grant sentience to Zombies and Skeletons?

Would you say that that spell forces a soul into their bodies? I wouldn't think so, because that implies the same occurs for Awaken Plants, Animals, etc.

The way I see it, it's magiclly possible to have an intelligent undead without a soul. So I think you could have both a Lich and a Brain in a Jar who are effectively the same person (the Brain in a Jar entry does imply a zombie brain is used, which is a soulless 'puppet' undead).

>Where does that leave the spell Awaken Undead,
It leaves it out of my game.
>Would you say that that spell forces a soul into their bodies?
Not using that spell, but any spell that animates Animate Dead would force their soul back into their body.
>The way I see it, it's magiclly possible to have an intelligent undead without a soul
Pic and filename related.

>You could turn that into a Brain in a Jar no problem, right?
Not only is the brain out of the body, it's already in a jar!
Probably pickled, too. You *just* need to add magic.

Here's what I think happens.

Darkdeath the Lich - Congrats on the lichdom my dude. Souls usually house the person themselves, so (setting allowing) this is Darkdeath with all the glories and trapping of lichhood.

The Brain of Von Evilberk - This is the conundrum. How Science! is your setting? Are you permitting the brain to be essentially the hardwiring of a person, even if the Soul exists? Is the undead freshly created, merely magical energy, or another soul pulled into it's place?

If it all fits, you've successfully created unlife in the preserved wires of Von Evilberk. This creature likely has most if not all of Darkdeath's memories, personality, preferences, faults, the works. A key note is that it is not Darkdeath himself, and depending on the nature of undead may be more cruel and generally evil, less 'characterised' or 'himself'. It might even suffer episodes of remembering the previous soul that was sucked into the brain for the necromancy, and have slight differences from Darkdeath besides.

It's an interesting conundrum and one I'm going to appropriate, thank you.

>Lich takes out his brain
>Resurrects it in a jar
>Both think they're the original
>The Brain believing that physical and material property's are the next way to advance, the lich thinking that spiritual and magical ways should be further followed

>and he's not willing to share his secrets anytime soon.
So how did he do it?

>He didn't.He's actually a lifeless corpse being animated by his "advisors" who are using him as a sort of propaganda piece to lead other necromancers.

Personally I like the idea of the brain only version acting initially about the same (maybe with some minor differences due to having no soul) but then accumulating a soul of his own over time and becoming his own person with a similar but not identical personality to the original.

...

Pretty much.

Brilliant. Five stars, that's a genuinely good twist.

Obviously you get 2 creatures sharing the same essence and mind and as such they both become insane.

Should also mention the only reason this sort of necromancer grouping is allowed is because they're doing it in the only area the gods and their angels can't reach, and they're too well-fortified for most mortal armies to get to(even if they didn't have the BBEG and the problem's he's causing to deal with).

Said place is also the only location in the setting where undead can be made without needing a soul to animate the body. Raising the dead without a soul just has one seem to pop into existence to fill the space, though doing so without proper control enchantments on the corpse is a bad idea since the resulting undead is always feral and indiscriminately attacks anything nearby. The reason for both this and the above paragraph is because it's where the fabric of reality is weakest, where a life-hating eldritch abomination hangs out. Raising the dead in such a manner basically gives it a physical form in the world. No one knows this because attempts to scry for an answer to both of the above questions results in the scryer suddenly screaming and shrivelling into a dead husk, a manner of death identical to someone having their soul forcefully torn out of their bodies, so most people just don't bother asking anymore.

Said beast is basically a conglomeration of souls, both from tainted undead (they can't go to the afterlife proper because their taint would destroy it) and from unborn souls so they were kinda tossed "nowhere" and eventually enough of them came together to create a form of sentience. This many souls basically gives it godhood.

Cont.

Basically, in this setting, more souls=more power. The gods themselves were an old adventuring party that somehow ended up in the afterlife while alive, and discovered they could absorb the souls that were already there, and the afterlife's unique properties let them absorb thousands of souls without dying(normally, more than one soul in a body is too much for it to handle). They also divided up the afterlife into an event referred to as the Fracture. This opened cracks in the afterlife that some souls fall through, which goes to the "nowhere" the undead soulbeast is, causing it to start growing powerful faster than it used to.

The soulbeast is only capable of affecting bare souls in the real world without some sort of catalyst(aforementioned animating dead rituals), so it just snacks on any angels(souls the gods empowered that they deemed too useful to simply absorb) that wander too close to it's domain.

The soulbeast is only one of two beings older than the gods, the other being Death who keeps his existence a secret from the gods, claiming it would "complicate things." He hates the gods for causing the Fracture since it made his job of guiding souls safely to the afterlife more difficult, but he's too busy making sure souls make it to the afterlife safely to go and kick them out himself so he's grudgingly fine keeping the status quo for now.

Kinda rambled on a bit there, but eh.

No necromancers from necromancer-town ever bothered to asked death about the soulbeast?

With the way things worked in 2e a player could have their body made into a vampire or other intelligent undead then be ressurected from another body part. There would be a living you and an undead you. There was a slight chance of insanity if you met yourself.

Magic jar and clone could also let you scry without actually going insane

Only way to see Death is to die. And Death is familiar with it, but he doesn't consider it a big enough threat to do anything about it himself yet.

The implication being that the things Death is keeping souls en route to the afterlife safe from are worse than soul beast.

Not that the necromancers even know said beast exists. Any attempts to learn any info about the nature of the Dead Isles ends in the soul tearing mentioned earlier. They only stay because it's the only safe haven they have from the angels that want them dead.

I should mention scrying works differently in this setting. What it does is put your soul into contact with another's that knows the answer to your question. The soul will answer it without the person's knowledge, though powerful magic users can feel it and counter scry to see what info you got from them.

The gods aren't immune to this, and if they're the only ones who know the answer to a question, you get connected to them. They are powerful enough to refuse to answer if they don't want to however.

With this, the only thing that knows about the soul beast's nature is itself, and getting your soul put in contact with it ends as well as you'd expect.

Death is outright immune to scrying of any sort.

>Is it possible?
I think it is entirely possible to craft a “Brain in a Jar” from a freshly made Lich’s brain.

>Would a Brain in a Jar require the original soul in order to animate it?
Depends entirely on whether the mysterious process of creating one involves using a soul.
This seems deliberately left vague.

In my setting, you cannot create intelligent life without a soul, but there are often plenty of spirits available to craft a new intelligence, but it would not retain full memories or personality.
It’s a bit like how vampires worked on Buffy.

>The entry suggests a zombie brain could be used which then grows to develop an intelligence and a zombie doesn't have a soul.
I agree with this. I suspect a Brain in a Jar does not require a soul.

>Do you think you could have two copies of Darkdeath von Evilberk? One who is a Lich and one who is his animated brain gained sentience, removed immediately after his death?
This is the real question.
To simplify it, I would reduce it to: How much of its original memories does a Brain in a Jar retain?

I tried to find an official citing of this and although many people assume that the memories are intact, I came up with nothing official.
However, the Brain in a Jar does have a significant Knowledge(history) skill.
At the very least, this implies that some memory is retained.
Also, being deeply psionic, the Brain in a Jar could scan the Lich’s memories and fill in the blanks.

In short, could you have two copies of Darkdeath von Evilberk?
Yes.
But while the Lich would be a true copy, the Brain in a Jar lacks the original soul and would be a flawed amalgam of the original.
Pic related

I would also rule that if the jar used in the process of creating the Brain in a Jar was a jar the Lich had made into its phylactery, the Brain in a Jar copy would be a much more closely similar copy, due to technically incorporating the original’s soul in the design.
Whether a Lich would want to do this, is arguable.

>Only way to see Death is to die.
Har de har har.

You just need 3 little sticks and 4cc of mouse blood.
Or 2 little sticks and a fresh egg, if you're a showoff.

They wouldn't be clones; it would be some sort of weird sensation where the consciousness is in two places at once. Probably not healthy for the mojo.

What if someone removed their own brain and split it in half thus creating a Left Brain in a Jar and a Right Brain in a Jar?

>read op
>oh hey you know you could have lich and brain be friends and help
>don't scroll down and read anyone else posting the exact same thing

half of you did this. someone else is going to do this

...

youtube.com/watch?v=wfYbgdo8e-8

I like the idea of the soul being split in some fancy magical ceremony, but it goes awry, and neither of the schisms are complete or functioning - it could give some interesting opportunities for villains

Brain in a Jar is an undead creature.
I think in general Pathfinder games, the thought is only done by the brain when it's populated by a soul. That's why a more powerful entity can possess another person's body - they're just forcibly taking control with magic.
An undead is (in cases like this) a computer made of revived dead brain tissue, and a lich is made by allowing the soul to inhabit the body without the restraint of the brain necessary.
You can make a brain in a jar from a lich's brain but it won't share his memories or thoughts, so there's no real reason to beyond making a fancy conversation piece for said lich. It likely wouldn't have any of the powers listed there since it would lack any desire to use them. May as well just freeze the brain and save your GP.