Larloch's consistent character traits:
- love of magic
- desire for power and knowledge, especially as related to magic
- self-protection
- collector of artifacts
- wizard of old Netheril
Would these traits remain consistent in 4E? As he might see them as competitors, would he naturally oppose the Shades and new Netheril?
As someone who holds vast amounts of ancient knowledge and lore, and someone who has "lived" far beyond his natural time, would be naturally oppose Shar and her desire for entropy?
Would Larloch, in an ironic sense, be more likely to help PCs than Elminster and the Chosen ever were? His enemies and the PCs enemies could be the same, after all, and while he might not be "good" it's quite possible he could assist them in similar goals.
Yes. I really do not see why his goals would change. However, I think he is most definitely working overtime to ensure that he is fully adapted to the new environment and situations that he is facing.
As he might see them as competitors, would he naturally oppose the Shades and new Netheril?
Yes. I also think it is beneficial (for balance reasons) to have him in that position. I am not saying that he's challenging them openly, but subverting their efforts through others? Definitely.
He likely doesn't leave Warlock's Keep. The Keep is so well protected that Netheril isn't likely going to penetrate it. At least not without MASSIVE and CRIPPLING casualties. While Larloch could likely mash anyone Netheril could throw against him individually, the likelihood of facing anyone individually is zero. He is out numbered, even if he is not out powered. This is why he'd rely on more subversive tactics.
As someone who holds vast amounts of ancient knowledge and lore, and someone who has "lived" far beyond his natural time, would be naturally oppose Shar and her desire for entropy?
He has had hundreds of years to turn to Shar. He hasn't, so I'd say that the answer there is No. Although, he is pragmatic and intelligent. He is not likely going to pick a fight with Shar, and anything he does that happens to interfere with her plans it'd be "nothing personal." I also wouldn't rule out a temporary alliance if they suddenly found mutually exclusive goals, but such an alliance would literally be temporary. (However, seeing as how both beings are immortal temporary could be a long time.)
Would Larloch, in an ironic sense, be more likely to help PCs than Elminster and the Chosen ever were?
He is pragmatic, so that depends. A better question might be: Would Larloch use the PCs to his own ends (in the same way Elminster would)? The answer there is yes, definitely. Larloch is pragmatic. He'll work with whoever he has to in order to accomplish his long term goals. The PC's may or may not share them, and may or may not know they are aiding him. Most likely, the PC's would likely find themselves working with Larloch against Netheril. Larloch may even go as far as to sponsor the Harper's.
If someone wanted to do that, Larloch may be aiding the Harpers in Everlund. Exchanges of knowledge, power, artifacts, etc. would all be essential to their survival. They'd need an ace in the hole if the Shades came knocking.
-----
Really, it comes down to this: The Shadovar are going to want Larloch's artifacts, power and knowledge. Larloch is going to want theirs. Both want stuff that once belonged to fallen Netheril. Therefore, they become enemies as a result of conflicting goals.
What I was told is that is EXACTLY how he was described when the setting was first being converted to commercial use by TSR.
Hows that for a friggin' guess? :D
Not that either is really 'good' or evil'. They would be more like Lawful evil vs Chaotic neutral.
Anyhow, we know that Larloch has some sort of 'secret purpose' given to him from 'on high', and he's supposed to be "watching out for something". We also know that Halsater is basically FR's portal-master, with portals in and around Undermountain leading to just about everywhere.
Toward the end of 3e, we were also told that Larloch had now become VERY interested in portals, and was trying to control them from afar, and also use them as scrying devices (pearing into those areas the portals lead to).
Methinks that Larloch's 'purpose' was a stop-measure to the immensly powerful Halaster (who was also quite insane), and Larloch is probably the only mortal being that might be able to stop anything BIG Halaster might be planning.
However, Halaster 'went sane' for a short while there, and even tried to prevent the Spellplague (apparently his former association with Shar gave him access to 'inside information'), and then he was destroyed (or at least, his soul was shatttered, which is pretty darn hard to come back from).
Which means Larloch is out of a job come post-1385 DR (if my assumptions were correct). If he really was assigned by Mystra to watch-over Halaster, and both he and her are now dead, that means Larloch can have his own agenda, and may not be staying home in Warlock's Crypt anymore.
Or, conversely, he pounced on Halaster's 'lair' after the Archmages death, and in studying Halaster's works, devices, and notes has now become just as insane as Halaster once was, and is now the new resident 'Nutcase' in Undermountain circa 1479.
He has had hundreds of years to turn to Shar. He hasn't, so I'd say that the answer there is No.
Actually, I was suggesting that his motivations would run counter to Shar, not that he would turn to Shar. Larloch turning to Shar seems almost impossible to me. He had a vested interest in Mystra, after all, and given her current absence, I think he'd be irked that Shar is preventing the rebirth of Mystra or the ascension of a new deity of magic.
Would he try something against Shar to allow Mystra's rebirth? Would Larloch attempt time travel to restore Mystra? Or would he try to ascend as a new deity of magic himself? He has always been motivated by the acquisition of power, after all.
It's also interesting and ironic that he naturally falls into the category of high-level threats to Netheril and the Shadowvar. Where the Chosen of Mystra would never openly attack Netheril, Larloch might devote a great deal of time and energy to undermining them at every turn: not only are they a potential future threat to his dominance of magic, but they represent the goddess who murdered his goddess -and- they are a constant and twisted reminder of his own lost culture.
Markus - not sure I buy into the idea that Larloch's sole purpose was to counter Halaster. Larloch was far more powerful, and he may have been asked by Mystra to keep an eye on Halaster, but Larloch has usually been presented as even more of a cypher than Halaster and the big L wasn't a Chosen of Mystra so far as we know.
Actually, I was suggesting that his motivations would run counter to Shar, not that he would turn to Shar. Larloch turning to Shar seems almost impossible to me. He had a vested interest in Mystra, after all, and given her current absence, I think he'd be irked that Shar is preventing the rebirth of Mystra or the ascension of a new deity of magic.
I would agree, that there is virtually no chance of him "worshiping" Shar. In fact, I'd say Larloch most likely does not worship any deity. He's a Lich, immortal, undead, his soul is taken care of, so any fear he'd have of the afterlife is pretty much non-existent. He's also of a power that he'd probably be able to challenge some of the weaker deities directly. He had agreements with Mystra, so I imagine that he is rather perturbed at the outcome, but I don't imagine that he is really holding a grudge.
After all, sometimes your plans don't exactly pan out the way you thought they would. When you're immortal and pragmatic-minded, you shrug it off and move to plan B, or just mark it down as a loss. Shar is powerful, no doubt even more so after the death of Mystra, and it is not as if Larloch is really interested in fighting her. There would be little point in that to him.
Now, where it becomes interesting, is this: If Shar were on the verge of achieving her goals would Larloch intervene? To that I'd say: It depends on a number of things. First, he'd weigh the odds. If he thought he'd lose, he'd just leave Toril entirely to flee to a place where he'd survive. Second, if he thought he could actually stop her (and survive any repercussions) he might do something. Although he'd weigh it carefully on what he'd gain from it verses what he'd lose.
In the end, I see Larloch as a very pragmatic and amoral individual. He isn't going to do anything that he does not benefit from, either directly or indirectly. Being immortal the benefit does not even have to be immediate - it can be decades or centuries away. He thinks on that timescale.
To answer your questions:
Would he try something against Shar to allow Mystra's rebirth? Would Larloch attempt time travel to restore Mystra? Or would he try to ascend as a new deity of magic himself?
No, he gains nothing or very little from it. Time Travel does not seem to have the ability to alter the past, so that's off the table and a waste of time. Helping raise a new deity to be the god(dess) of magic is unlikely as he'd have to protect her/him from Shar until they gained in power to protect themselves. Not likely to happen unless Shar wanted Larloch dead, but doing something to provoke her further is not exactly a wise move so even then it isn't very likely. Finally, if Larloch was interested in Godhood he could have achieved it by now himself.
As things currently stand, he is in a much better position. He has virtually god-like power, but without all the responsibilities, burdens, and rules of being a deity. The only reason I'd see him seeking godhood was if it was a matter of necessity, and was better than some other alternative. But it isn't something I see him wanting: much like Myrkul is more happy being trapped in the Crown of Horns.
It's also interesting and ironic that he naturally falls into the category of high-level threats to Netheril and the Shadowvar. Where the Chosen of Mystra would never openly attack Netheril, Larloch might devote a great deal of time and energy to undermining them at every turn: not only are they a potential future threat to his dominance of magic, but they represent the goddess who murdered his goddess -and- they are a constant and twisted reminder of his own lost culture.
I am in disagreement. The Chosen of Mystra would be doing the same thing Larloch is most likely doing: working to subvert Netheril, but not attacking it openly. They'd have different motivations, of course, but they'd both face the same challenges. Namely that the Netherese out number them. A head to head battle is likely going to result in their deaths, even Larloch's. He'd most likely end up destroying them in the process, but it'd be the equivalent of a suicide attack.
Additionally, as I wrote earlier, I really don't think he considered Mystra "his goddess." I don't envision Larloch as being particularly pious. He may have had fond feelings toward Mystra, but his attachment to her was more through various agreements. Keep in mind that throughout Larloch's life he's seen three different incarnations of Mystra come and go. Mystra version 3 barely lasted longer than a flicker of a candle flame. It is unlikely that Larloch was overly attached enough to actually hold a grudge that would last a hundred years.
I'm not even sure, at this point in Larloch's undead existence, that he'd really even care that they'd call themselves Netherese or not. Of course, he may be slightly insulted, but that would not be his primary motivator. It is more, in my mind, an issue of conflicting goals. It is also likely that the Netherese "started it" by directly working against him. They'd want all that he has, that is certain, just as they want all former Netherese artifacts and such.
So in my mind, it's more that the Shadowvar made enemies with Larloch, than Larloch actively sought out them as foes. In all likelihood he likely would have just watched them for a few decades, sent out spies to collect information, and remained decidedly hands off. He'd then wait till they'd destroyed themselves to descend and take whatever he wanted. That's another way to play it, but I think they'd force Larloch's hand in matters. Plus, it is nice to have him as a balancing force.
I haven't read the books, and from what I've been told, it sounds like their plot is horrible... but we know Tam has had a strong connection with Larloch. We know what Tam has done, and the question is: Did he do something against Larloch's wishes or did he do it with his help?
I don't see Larloch as helping Tam in this, mostly because I don't see any benefit to him. Plus, seeing as Tam failed any benefit Larloch may have obtained is no longer present. Even so, Tam now rules Thay undisputed.
However, the question of their alliance comes into question. Are they still aligned, or has Tam found a way to slight Larloch in such a way as to make him an enemy? If so, what does that mean for Thay and Tam?
Given that Larloch's primary motivation appears to have been the garnering of magical power...
I'm not sure that's true. It's not clear what any of Larloch's motivations are, let alone his primary. Something that is complicated by his bouts of insanity. As well as his ridiculous age. Arguably, Larloch's primary motivation is nothing more than mere survival.
I think, when it comes to Larloch in 4E, the more interesting question is: How does he feel about Szass Tam and Thay now.
I haven't read the books, and from what I've been told, it sounds like their plot is horrible... but we know Tam has had a strong connection with Larloch. We know what Tam has done, and the question is: Did he do something against Larloch's wishes or did he do it with his help?
I don't see Larloch as helping Tam in this, mostly because I don't see any benefit to him. Plus, seeing as Tam failed any benefit Larloch may have obtained is no longer present. Even so, Tam now rules Thay undisputed.
However, the question of their alliance comes into question. Are they still aligned, or has Tam found a way to slight Larloch in such a way as to make him an enemy? If so, what does that mean for Thay and Tam?
-Given their odd relationship, I really don't see Szass Tam as doing anything against Larloch's opinion/want, ultimately. Anything Tam does, it is likely that he has the approval, of sorts, of Larloch. Perhaps I put too much credence and weight into their "friendship", though.
Keep in mind I haven't read the novels involving these events, and from everything I do know I've more or less hated... but it's cannon so it's up for debate...
Tam's objective, to my understanding, was to become a god. He basically wanted to sacrifice the lives of everyone in Thay in some massive ritual. If that was his goal, and Tam being the scheming SOB that he is... I could see him manipulating his relationship with Larloch to get himself into a position where he is able to accomplish the ritual. However, once he completed the ritual and became a deity, he wouldn't need Larloch anymore.
So if you calculate things from Tam's prospective: I'm going to be successful, I can betray Larloch and get away with it, because once I'm a deity he can't touch me.
Except, he failed.
My reasoning for thinking this is because I really do not see any benefit in what Tam did for Larloch, and I do not imagine Tam having the power to do some of the things he did without the aid (either directly or indirectly) of Larloch.
Of course, if he and Tam are still BFF's then that should scare the poop out of Netheril. :P
Tam's objective, to my understanding, was to become a god. He basically wanted to sacrifice the lives of everyone in Thay in some massive ritual. If that was his goal, and Tam being the scheming SOB that he is... I could see him manipulating his relationship with Larloch to get himself into a position where he is able to accomplish the ritual. However, once he completed the ritual and became a deity, he wouldn't need Larloch anymore.
It's worse then that. He would have ended everything in and remade it in his own way as a being beyond even Ao.
Tam's objective, to my understanding, was to become a god. He basically wanted to sacrifice the lives of everyone in Thay in some massive ritual. If that was his goal, and Tam being the scheming SOB that he is... I could see him manipulating his relationship with Larloch to get himself into a position where he is able to accomplish the ritual. However, once he completed the ritual and became a deity, he wouldn't need Larloch anymore.
So if you calculate things from Tam's prospective: I'm going to be successful, I can betray Larloch and get away with it, because once I'm a deity he can't touch me.
Except, he failed.
My reasoning for thinking this is because I really do not see any benefit in what Tam did for Larloch, and I do not imagine Tam having the power to do some of the things he did without the aid (either directly or indirectly) of Larloch.
Of course, if he and Tam are still BFF's then that should scare the poop out of Netheril. :P
-Being a deity doesn't necessarily mean much. We don't know how high Szass Tam's DR would have been, I don't believe. Ultimatley, I don't see a mortal ritual artificially creating a deity that is massively powerful. The closest case that can be made would be Karsus' Avatar, but that didn't artificially create divine power (it "stole" it), and Karsus was a lot more accomplished that Szass Tam is/was. Finder Wyvernspur, a fairly minor deity, mentioned in Finder's Bane that in a "fair fight", he and a Banelich were roughly on the same power level. So, if Szass Tam was elevated to the position of minor deity, like Finder Wyvernspur, Larloch would still loom large, way over his head, regardless of his divinity.
-Hmm...Faiths and Pantheons doesn't actually have the CRs of the people in it, but it does have their full stat blocks. I always thought it did. Oh well.
-Ultimatley, with Szass Tam possibly becoming a deity, Larloch has plenty to gain. If, perhaps, Szass Tam was seeking to become a deity associated with magic (and the whole Velsharoon angle adds some credence to this- in that he and Szass Tam were enemies, and that Velsharoon appeared in the East upon his "death"), that would suit Larloch's means. I don't believe that he had any special love or affinity for Mystra, but rather, for a deity of magic. If Szass Tam became that entity (or anyone/anything else, for that matter), I think he'd have a very similar relationship with that entity.
Ugh. That's even worse than I already thought it was. Most of what I had heard about it was crap, but that just makes it worse.
Yeah, I'd say Larloch and Tam are no longer BFF's and it is likely Larloch wants to mash Tam like a bug. He may even hate Tam more than Netheril, he was personally betrayed.
Lord Karsus-
I am hearing two different things from you and krownhunter07.
Conversely, Larloch was known to give Szass Tam several artifacts... perhaps there were 'strings attached', magically, and unbeknowst to Tam. What if Larloch was helping Szass Tam achieve godhood, with the ultimate goal of snatching it away from him by previously engineered means? In fact, once again, that could be why Szass Tam failed... maybe Larloch diverted the power to himself.
Oh... and Halaster was ancient before Larloch was even born... and Halaster was still living, which means (to me, at any rate) that he was far more powerful (he never needed to become a Lich).
Although Ed says that Larloch is insane (in a similar way to Elminster's insanity) I think it can be argued that undeath has likely steadied Larloch's mind far more in that department. I think on the insanity scale Elminster was further out ahead, and any insanity Larloch had was from his vast power – and has less to do with his age.
---
I know that Larloch gave Tam several powerful artifacts, which is what I was thinking when I talked about betrayal. Essentially he could have told Larloch that he was going to use them for one thing and then instead used them differently, or used them as he said but left out the part where it had negative impacts on Larloch.
Regardless, if krownhunter07 is correct in his relaying of events, I think it'd be safe to say that Larloch and Tam aren't on friendly terms.
The Ritual in question came from a book said to be made during the first days of creation by primordial powers.
Is he any relation to Austin Powers? :P
I think, when it comes to Larloch in 4E, the more interesting question is: How does he feel about Szass Tam and Thay now.
I haven't read the books, and from what I've been told, it sounds like their plot is horrible... but we know Tam has had a strong connection with Larloch. We know what Tam has done, and the question is: Did he do something against Larloch's wishes or did he do it with his help?
I don't see Larloch as helping Tam in this, mostly because I don't see any benefit to him. Plus, seeing as Tam failed any benefit Larloch may have obtained is no longer present. Even so, Tam now rules Thay undisputed.
However, the question of their alliance comes into question. Are they still aligned, or has Tam found a way to slight Larloch in such a way as to make him an enemy? If so, what does that mean for Thay and Tam?
Well, I too haven't read the latest books, and unless Larloch doesn't makes a cameo (and unless I'm not mistaken), I think the introduction of Netheril: Empire of Magic is the latest source on the relashionship between Larloch and Szass Tam. Well, I guess I'll read over it again, but as far as I can remember I had the impression of Tam being just a pawn of Larloch. Clearly inferior to Larloch (but perhaps this was just Larloch's arrogance).
-Being a deity doesn't necessarily mean much. We don't know how high Szass Tam's DR would have been, I don't believe. Ultimatley, I don't see a mortal ritual artificially creating a deity that is massively powerful. The closest case that can be made would be Karsus' Avatar, but that didn't artificially create divine power (it "stole" it), and Karsus was a lot more accomplished that Szass Tam is/was. Finder Wyvernspur, a fairly minor deity, mentioned in Finder's Bane that in a "fair fight", he and a Banelich were roughly on the same power level. So, if Szass Tam was elevated to the position of minor deity, like Finder Wyvernspur, Larloch would still loom large, way over his head, regardless of his divinity.
-Hmm...Faiths and Pantheons doesn't actually have the CRs of the people in it, but it does have their full stat blocks. I always thought it did. Oh well.
CR is only a measurement between the PCs and their foes, not between NPCs, monsters, deities, and so on. So while you can compare their CRs to the PCs and then see who's got the higher one, you cannot compare their power directly. ;)
Oh... and Halaster was ancient before Larloch was even born... and Halaster was still living, which means (to me, at any rate) that he was far more poweful (he never needed to become a Lich).
Just because he's older doesn't mean he's more powerful. And who knows what means the Imaskari really had to prolong a mortal life?
Is he any relation to Austin Powers? :P
Distant (and bitter) cousins. It seem that Pri-Powers sided with Dr. Evil back in the 60's...
On that note, Szass Tam was an aberration. :P
What I liked to know is what happened to that Baelnorn gaurding the Calimemnon Crystal when it exploded (and released those Dgen) - he was THE oldest being on Toril (aside from those Sarrukh Liches, which are also curiously absent in 4e).
That guy may have actually seen Dark Elves before there were Drow.
(aside from those Sarrukh Liches, which are also curiously absent in 4e).
Not absent, just not mentioned yet... Honestly, did we have all the juicy obscure lore at the start of any edition?
EDIT: Also, it isn't hard to make one. A Sarrukh is in the FRCG. Use that, reflavor to make it unique and add the lich template. BOOM!
We needn't jump on everything the 'other guy' is saying... people tend to have a very low 'boiling point' on this site.
I am well aware of the fact that 4eFR is new, and that the Liches haven't been mentioned because there hasn't been a vehicle to showcase them in yet - I merely mentioned the fact that they haven't been detailed... which I, personally found curious, given the rise of Shade/Netherease power in Anauroch.
And that was it... it certainly wasn't a 'dis' by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry if you saw it that way.
In most cases, when dealing with Mages, Age=Power.
Yeah, in most cases, though there are several exceptions to this rule. Most notably Karsus.
Anyway, Meldread already said most things I wanted to say, but there's still one thing.
Imo the reason why Larloch isn't allied with or even is an enemy of the Shades is due to his mentality of him being the last classical arcanist of old. While other guys are still out there, with the most prominent among them the Shades (or Lord Shadow only, who's embraced shadow-stuff) and Ioulaum (who's departed even further from his old life), Larloch might be the only arcanist-king who still embraces Netheril's art, power, and legacy.
Peace, Krown.
We needn't jump on everything the 'other guy' is saying... people tend to have a very low 'boiling point' on this site.
I am well aware of the fact that 4eFR is new, and that the Liches haven't been mentioned because there hasn't been a vehicle to showcase them in yet - I merely mentioned the fact that they haven't been detailed... which I, personally found curious, given the rise of Shade/Netherease power in Anauroch.
And that was it... it certainly wasn't a 'dis' by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry if you saw it that way.
My intent wasn't to argue, sorry if it came out that way. I saw your post and came out with an easy solution (and pointed out that WotC can't update everything at once, but the tools are there to do so).
I wasn't angry or anything... nor did I think you 'dissed' anything. Perhaps I should word my posts differently in the future?
I wasn't angry or anything... nor did I think you 'dissed' anything. Perhaps I should word my posts differently in the future?
No worries - I had just thought you took offense somehow to my saying "we had no information", which wasn't my intent.
I think, perhaps, now I'm becoming overly self-conscious about NOT insulting 4e. :embarrass
I think it would be kinda cool to read a short-story about a meeting between Larloch, Ioulum, Aumvor, Thakloamur, and Lady Saharel, and they get together to discuss what to do about 'the kids'. :D
I can see that being, unintentionally of course, extremely comical...
No worries - I had just thought you took offense somehow to my saying "we had no information", which wasn't my intent.
I think, perhaps, now I'm becoming overly self-conscious about NOT insulting 4e. :embarrass
No problem, I think everyone gets jumpy at some point or another.
Larloch (unless things have changed in 4e) has over 60 liches under his control.
There are (unless things have changed in 4e) only 500 Shades among the Shadovar. Considering that Larloch is exponentially more powerful than Lord Shadow and all those liches are probably on par with his sons, that still leaves another 50 liches to take care of the rest of the Shades, the enclaves, and Sembia.
Not to mention any other resources/allies/slaves/etc that Larloch has on hand. If the Shades angered Larloch enough to have him decide to destroy them, I believe it would all be over in less than 24 hours.
There are roughly 50,000 Netherese if you combine both the Shade Enclave and Sakkors. No, not all of them are Shades, but the Shade Enclave has "legions of dark-armored swordmages patrol the city." Of those numbers it does not include Sembia or those living outside of the Enclaves.
So, in effect you'd have between 60-100 Liches of varying power against a force of between 5,000 and 10,000 capable fighting individuals, most of which who can wield magic to some degree (just from the Shade Enclave.) Larloch is easily worth 3,000 ish alone. So it's simply a matter of math and common sense. An open assault means Larloch is not only going against numbers, he is going against magical defenses, some of which might be prepared specifically to deal with an event such as what is occurring.
By the time Larloch breaks through the defenses, most of his liches are dead, and while he would inevitably win - he'd walk away with less than he'd gain from the victory. In essence, it's not an argument that Larloch would not win (the odds are in his favor because he is so powerful), it's that the victory isn't worth the price.
That being said, he'd be more than happy to use others to destroy Netheril. Which is why he could potentially support the Harpers in Everlund. Just so long as he personally does not have to sacrifice too much, except perhaps time (and being immortal he has plenty) and minor trinkets of power (comparatively to him - a 'minor trinket' from Larloch might look like something from Elminster's best stash).
I guess some of this also depends on how much Larloch cares about the equipment that his liches would lose as they are killed.
- they're all telepathically linked, and under his control. That means Larloch has an unmatchable awareness of everything they can sense, plus the ability to directly coordinate and direct his most powerful minions.
- many of his liches are archmages.
- Larloch also has a host of vampires and countless other undead under his control.
If Larloch threw his entire army at Netheril, it's unlikely that he would lose anything at all. Maybe some of his undead, maybe a lich or two, easily replaced by the humans being killed during the attack.
If he wanted to destroy Netheril, he'd do it from far, far away. He'd gather all his liches together, and conduct some massively huge ritual. That is how he would handle it.
But you have to look at it from the prospective of cost. Such a ritual isn't cheap. Plus there is the likelihood that a good chunk of Faerûn would end up a wasteland. (Image of what it'd likely look like from the Anauroch to Sembia.) Basically, nothing but a barren, twisted wasteland of destruction. As if you dropped hundreds of nuclear weapons.
So imagine the consequences of that... not only would he have to pay the cost to perform a ritual that would completely annihilate Netheril, he'd have more than a handful of angry powerful individuals wanting his head, as well as more than a few deities.
This is somewhat like the argument: If Shar is the goddess of secrets, then how come she hasn't already defeated every god(dess) by now? She'd know their secret weaknesses, and their secret plots, and would be able to use them to her advantage. Or since Mystra is the goddess (or rather was the goddess) of the Weave, Magic and Spells why doesn't she just tell Elminster what spells he needs to prepare before hand before going off to face an enemy mage?
There are generally speaking things stopping them (whether we know it or not :P). Otherwise, things would not be logically consistent. For Larloch, it is the consequences of destroying the Netherese and the associated cost. It is much easier for him to plot their destruction over the course of decades, perhaps centuries, than it is to intervene directly himself. He can use proxies to destroy them. He is immortal and has all the time in the world.
The gods are limited in certain aspects by divine barrier / law (perhaps created by Ao) that prevents Shar from knowing every secret imaginable, especially the secrets of the other deities. Mystra can't intervene on Elminster's behalf by giving him pre-knowledge of an enemies spell list, because if she did that other deities might begin to intervene similarly and it would create a messy situation (not to mention be frowned on by Ao).
Larloch: "Surrender this enclave to me immediately and no-one will be harmed"
Telemont: "You must be joking...."
Larloch: "I NEVER joke... my sense of humour rotted away centuries ago".
And he teleports back to Warlock's Crypt and tries to figure out how to get that stuff back from Ioulum....
-Ultimatley, regardless of who says what about Larloch, Mephistopheles outclasses him like Larloch outclasses Szass Tam.
-If it came to a blow by blow direct assault upon Warlock's Crypt by the Shadovar- I would hope they wouldn't be that tactless and stupid, though- I don't see the Shadovar surviving such a conflict for very long.
That is his purpose - to always be that one guy no-one will dare mess with (not even Chosen).
So when the Shades arrived, Larloch merely jumped-up about 10 levels or so (because that is his nature).
I'm sure if he actually wanted to become a god, he could have long ago. Godhood ain't all it's cracked-up to be, and he knows it (ANY being from an outer or inner plane can be 'bound' - only creatures native to the prime material can't be).
Think about it - if a couple of low-level wanna-bes were able to become gods during the ToT, I'm sure Larloch could have as well (he probably could have tracked down all the Avatars and killed them, if that was his desire).
He has other... interests. Anything that falls outside of that isn't worth his notice.
Larloch will virtually NEVER leave Warlocks Crypt. Ever. People come to him, not the other way around, and if he wants to deliver a message to you and he can't do it magically, he'd send one of his liches. In most cases some of his most powerful liches could defeat the likes of Elminster, so it isn't like there is a -serious- danger of them running into trouble.
He'd view the Netherese as enemies, because they share competing goals. It isn't his style to wipe them out. He'll subvert them where and when he can, and take some amusement at screwing over their plans. He'd probably support a group that tried to destroy them and wipe them out, but that'd be more for his personal enjoyment than out of any real necessity on his part. The Shadovar simply are not a major threat to him. It's more like an annoying fly buzzing around your head, annoying but not deadly. (At absolute best you could compare them to a mosquito, but they'd hardly be more than that.)
-Hey, don't forget, Telamont and a few other Shadovar made Mephistopheles (Did I do it right?) proverbially "bow".
-Ultimatley, regardless of who says what about Larloch, Mephistopheles outclasses him like Larloch outclasses Szass Tam.
But Sazz Tam summonded and bound Bane for a some time. So if Telamont > Meph, Meph > Larloch, Larloch > Sazz, Sazz > Bane and Bane > all (because he is the only one here who is a god) than we are stuck :D
-Hey, don't forget, Telamont and a few other Shadovar made Mephistopheles (Did I do it right?) proverbially "bow".
-Ultimatley, regardless of who says what about Larloch, Mephistopheles outclasses him like Larloch outclasses Szass Tam.
Actually, according to the official 3.0 stats, Telamont would be superior to both of them. Then Larloch and at last Mephi. I think we such a discussion before, and I don't think we came to an agreement.
Anyway, on topic.
IF there were a fight between Larloch and his liches and Shadow and his sons + empire, it would be quite unlikely that Larloch and Shadow would participate in the battle at the front, but rather they would gather for a 'fair' duel. Of course, later Shadow would summon his sons, and Larloch would, well... come up with some back-up plan for such a situation.
Anyway, the point is that no arcanist-king would risk his life and reputation on the battlefield when there is even a minimal chance for failure. That's the reason why soldiers exist. So it comes down to Larloch vs Shadow, and while Larloch might be more powerful I see Shadow being the one with the more effective resources (enclave + sons).
Actually, according to the official 3.0 stats, Telamont would be superior to both of them. Then Larloch and at last Mephi. I think we such a discussion before, and I don't think we came to an agreement.
-No we didn't.
He likely doesn't leave Warlock's Keep. The Keep is so well protected that Netheril isn't likely going to penetrate it. At least not without MASSIVE and CRIPPLING casualties. While Larloch could likely mash anyone Netheril could throw against him individually, the likelihood of facing anyone individually is zero. He is out numbered, even if he is not out powered. This is why he'd rely on more subversive tactics.
What I'm saying is that he does not have to rely on subversive tactics because he is outnumbered (and therefore can be outmaneuvered) yeah, there are many other reasons why he wouldn't attack, but any fear of the Shadovar's tactical abilities is not part of it.
Until it was mentioned, I hadn't realized that technically by old 3.5 stats that Telemont was a higher level than Larloch. That does seem odd.
Until it was mentioned, I hadn't realized that technically by old 3.5 stats that Telemont was a higher level than Larloch. That does seem odd.
Actually, 3.0 stats. Neither Telamont nor Larloch had official 3.5 stats. ;)
Imo it doesn't really seem odd. Considering Larloch's first official level as at lvl 26 (in Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast), while Shadow's was at lvl 28 (in Netheril: EoM). Only Ed Greenwood said that Larloch might be on lvl 46, though this actually means that he simply should be more powerful than the PCs. And at last in 3e Larloch had a CR 34 while Telamont had a CR 37.
He was never suposed to have 'set stats', and earlier works (1e/2e) make a point of telling the DM to adjust the stats upward or downward depending on the level of their campign (for all NPCs, not just Larloch).
Its a game people... the novels screwed it all up.
And the stats in the sourcebooks are merely suggestions - the DM gets final call about everything in D&D.
And the stats in the sourcebooks are merely suggestions - the DM gets final call about everything in D&D.
Truth.
That means in your home game you can have Telamont eat Larloch for breakfast if that is what you wanted. There is always a .01% chance it could happen if he out smarted him and lured him into some type of trap.
I wonder who would win between them?
He was never suposed to have 'set stats', and earlier works (1e/2e) make a point of telling the DM to adjust the stats upward or downward depending on the level of their campign (for all NPCs, not just Larloch).
Its a game people... the novels screwed it all up.
And the stats in the sourcebooks are merely suggestions - the DM gets final call about everything in D&D.
This is worth quoting again.
Bear in mind, too, that a lot of the level numbers and stats in both 2E and 3E books were made up by the editors or developers, and shouldn't be taken as Realmslore or representing the design intent. And the stat blocks in 3E sources reflect the particular designer's interpretation of the character, the level scale, and the context of the actual or implied encounter -- so comparisons of levels in one book with those in another don't mean much.
Bear in mind, too, that a lot of the level numbers and stats in both 2E and 3E books were made up by the editors or developers, and shouldn't be taken as Realmslore or representing the design intent. And the stat blocks in 3E sources reflect the particular designer's interpretation of the character, the level scale, and the context of the actual or implied encounter -- so comparisons of levels in one book with those in another don't mean much.
That's really a nice way to tell someone 'Your stats are are uncreative and flawed!'. Not that I think this holds true for some of them
Which is why we get different stats for the same NPCs in different sourcebooks. Thats not even counting the dozens of fanbrew interpretations I have seen for just about everybody (Drizzt having a least a hundred).
The other problem resides in the timing of the statblocks. Books that come after often have new Feats and PrCs that could better interpret what certain characters can do in the novels. Since the D&D rules are forever evolving, we can never truly have a 'set' stat-block for a powerful NPC.
Add to that the third problem, which doesn't really effect the FR material as much, but is VERY annoying to people who use a lot of 3rd party products (like myself): Only certain core books are part of the OGL, so NPCs in 3rd party sources are going to be handicapped from the get-go.
And then there is the problem of 'author caveat', wherein the writer needs for a certain character to be able to do something, so he "just can". A recent example of this is in the novel Swordmage (which I did enjoy), wherein the main character can use magic... which he shouldn't be able to do. Now, I'm not knocking that - I'm smart enough to realize that novel-characters are supposed to be 'bigger then life'. They are there just to give us a good story, not to follow a certain set of rules. However, it does tend to add fuel to an alarming trend -
People expect their game PCs to be able to do the stuff novel-characters can, and oft-times designers 'give in' to the need to placate these people. THAT I have a HUGE problem with. I have seen for four editions now rules being changed to better fit the novels, rather then the other way around (Drow using their abilites on the surface, for example, thanks to Drizzt).
The best thing you can do for yourself is remember that the game you play in is in an alternate universe from the novels, and those events, characters, and plots don't necessarlly play themselves out the same way in your game world. They may, or they may not, and certain NPCs may not even exist, or act completely different.
Thats why Stat-blocks are just suggestions - they are a starting point, and you are supposed to customize them to fit your game. I've noted an alarming trend in D&D which seems to get worse with each edition - players seem to feel that the DM has to follow the rules...
NOT!!!!
I've actually seen threads where players accuse their DMs of 'cheating'. A lot of new players seem to think the DM is an opponent, and is there for them to 'beat'. I don't want to get into game-philosophy here, but this problem seems to have aggravated another 'perceived' problem: that DMs must stick faithfully to the canon.
Nothing can be further from the truth. It's THAT mindset that made people think there was "too much lore" in FR, because the players actually expected their DMs to know everything. The simple fact is, everything in the world the DM runs happens exactly according to the way he envisions it... and that includes game statistics as well as fluff.
And like the lore, the stats-blocks are just guidelines, to be used or tossed aside as the DM sees fit.
There are too many people trying so hard to 'beat' the game, that they can no longer simply ENJOY the game. If I had any hope at all for 4e, it was that it would restore the game to it's former glory, and put the power back into the DMs hands.
Having a magic item would work (Hedge Wizard gloves already out). Having it as a feat works (Gnomes have a feat the lets them use some cantrips as encounter powers). Having it just be fluff is fine as well, since it isn't that big of a stretch and fits the character.
That's really a nice way to tell someone 'Your stats are are uncreative and flawed!'.
Not at all -- just that they shouldn't be mistaken for definitive and universal.
This 'fog of war' isn't just a rah-rah encouragement to DMs, it's inherent in the setting itself. Because the Realms is essentially fictive, only characters' approximate capabilities are part of the setting lore. Implicit in every character level and write-up is the caveat, 'Well, if you want to nail this down, it could be like this.' In the same way, the 'it depends on who's writing it' response to who would win a fight between two vaguely-on-par characters is not a diplomatic hand-wave, it's the correct answer.
Now, I'm not knocking that - I'm smart enough to realize that novel-charcters are supposed to be 'bigger then life'. They are there just to give us a good story, not to follow a certain set of rules. However, it does tend to add fuel to an alarming trend -
People expect their game PCs to be able to do the stuff novel-characters can, and oft-times designers 'give in' to the need to placate these people. THAT I have a HUGE problem with. I have seen for four editions now rules being changed to better fit the novels, rather then the other way around (Drow using their abilites on the surface, for example, thanks to Drizzt).
Of course, player characters are also there to give a good (collaboratively told) story rather than to follow the rules, which should (in the original Realms design philosophy) facilitate the setting and characters and not vice versa. The occasional criticism that Realms NPC write-ups sometimes let them do things that PCs can't is misguided because the assumption has always been that PCs often have little knacks or wild talents as well. In Ed's campaign he never felt the need to crystallize these into hard-and-fast consistent rules -- and what works well as DM improvisation or a semi-definite house rule leads to different expectations and play likelihoods when published as an official character 'option'.
There are instances where authors stretch the fabric of the Realms here and there, just as there are when game rules don't quite represent it right, but by and large things do, that is can, work much the same in RPG play or linear narrative, because many of the same dynamics apply.
I've noted an alarming trend in D&D which seems to get worse with each edition - players seem to feel that the DM has to follow the rules...
NOT!!!!
I've actually seen threads where players accuse their DMs of 'cheating'. A lot of new players seem to think the DM is an opponent, and is there for them to 'beat'.
Let's say that while this might be a self-consistent and workable approach it isn't the Realms', or that of traditional forms of D&D and RPGs. The background from which the published Realms emerged included Dragon articles by Ed such as "Players don't need to know all the rules".
I've noted an alarming trend in D&D which seems to get worse with each edition - players seem to feel that the DM has to follow the rules...
NOT!!!!
One issue I have here. When it comes to PC interaction with the world, I believe the DM should have to follow the rules.
The last time I got to play a PC in an in-person game, the DM (who was a player of mine) went ahead and 'winged' it about something that was clearly in the rules.
His improvisation caused my PC to trip on a ship (10 feet for the railing, BTW), fall overboard and drowned. I tried to explain that there were rules that covered this, but he wanted to do it his way and check the rules later.
I was so ****** I was shaking in anger... he left soon after and we went back to playing the game I DM'd for. I don't mind being a player for DM's that aren't subject matter experts, but I can't stand when a DM is ignorant of the rules, won't listen to their players who are knowledgeable, and just 'wing it' without consistency and/or making a houserule agreed upon by the group.
I honestly can't say I know anyone who has a better grasp of the rules then I do (and I don't mean that in a cocky way), and I'm more then willing to help out a DM that needs it.
But it drives me mad beyond reason when someone acts in ignorance at the cost of others...
Err... and Larloch rocks!?!
[/rant]
So does Ed, BTW. ;)
We both 'grew-up' when there weren't rules for most situations, and we learned to fudge them.
I'm certainly not going to bother learning 90% of the rules that I will only use 1% of the time!
Not when I've been running successful (and fun) games for thirty years.
I had a rules-lawyer once... he didn't last very long (I believe he's still in therapy). :P
Edit: However, I would never kill a NPC because of 'happenstance'... NEVER. If he did something VERY stupid, then I might (and that only happened once). You can 'wing-it' and still make the game very enjoyable for everyone.
You'd never survive in one of my games - I rarely reference the rules, and 'wing it' constantly.
So does Ed, BTW. ;)
We both 'grew-up' when there weren't rules for most situations, and we learned to fudge them.
I'm certainly not going to bother learning 90% of the rules that I will only use 1% of the time!
Not when I've been running successful (and fun) games for thirty years.
I had a rules-lawyer once... he didn't last very long (I believe he's still in therapy). :P
Hey now, I'm not a rules-lawyer, I'm just the guy that reads it once and knows forever more... remembering what I know, on the other hand, is getting hard to do (curse PTSD to the bottomless pit!).
Anyways, I first played AD&D, which was also rules-lite compared to how things are now. I had a kickass DM at the time and the game was fun.
However, as time rolls on and I grew up, I came to appreciate having an SOP. Whims are good for self indulgence, but it isn't good for a collective story were 90% of the tellers have to follow the rules.
Now I DM almost all the time, so I can run a good game without bogging down the story, but I've come to learn that that is an exception rather then a rule.
I suppose, like so many other aspects of life, I'm rather intolerant toward people less capable then myself. I try not to be, but it is ingrained in who I am... Yes, I seem a cold hearted *******, but only because I demand people around me be competent (serving in the Army, the last thing you want is soldiers who don't know their jobs).
hmm... I suppose I'll be stuck with DM'ing... Unless I play online, they can't see how ****** I get through the internet and it stands to reason I'll have an opportunity to correct any mistakes someone makes.
As long as you remember to leave the rulebook home. ;)
I'm very up-front about that, BTW - I even have my own magic system, and have greatly modified the combat system (so folks know right away that my games are only 'losely based on D&D').
You wouldn't need to re-learn anything, though, since most of it is transparent to the players - I even use the spells as-is out of the D&D rules.
I'm planning on getting Monte Cook's Experimental Might, just because he took the trouble to divide all the existing spells into 20 levels, rather then just the nine, which is something I've been meaning to do for a long time. The game would go so much easier without having to figure-out the difference between caster-level, and 'highest level spell castable'.
Plus it would just work better with my spellpoint system.
Anyhow, that just gives you some idea of how I change things, so there are no illusions about playing D&D at my table (even though I call it D&D, its more of a hombrew RPG).
And I think Larloch would approve.
And at last in 3e Larloch had a CR 34 while Telamont had a CR 37.
CR in 3rd edition is almost meaningless in gauging actual power. A Lernaean hydra with a couple of templates (Half-dragon black dragon and troll) were far more powerful than creatures 10 CRs higher than they were.
The only real way to make any sense of a characters power in 3rd is to actually pick apart and analyse in depth their stat block. A NPC without specific vulnerabilities to a lot of things in 3rd edition is only as powerful as the single round DC it needs to fail to instantly die. So if Larlochs stat block had a lot of powers and abilities (lots of ability to prepare magical defenses and such forth, immunity to scrying, preventing teleportation, immunity to many instant death effects etc) that another lacks, even if Larloch has a lower CR he is considerably more powerful.
As I have seen neither stat block, I can't tell which is more powerful. But I can tell you immediately that CR is pretty worthless in general for deciding the power of things, especially at epic levels.
CR in 3rd edition is almost meaningless in gauging actual power. A Lernaean hydra with a couple of templates (Half-dragon black dragon and troll) were far more powerful than creatures 10 CRs higher than they were.
The only real way to make any sense of a characters power in 3rd is to actually pick apart and analyse in depth their stat block. A NPC without specific vulnerabilities to a lot of things in 3rd edition is only as powerful as the single round DC it needs to fail to instantly die. So if Larlochs stat block had a lot of powers and abilities (lots of ability to prepare magical defenses and such forth, immunity to scrying, preventing teleportation, immunity to many instant death effects etc) that another lacks, even if Larloch has a lower CR he is considerably more powerful.
As I have seen neither stat block, I can't tell which is more powerful. But I can tell you immediately that CR is pretty worthless in general for deciding the power of things, especially at epic levels.
So I already said this somewhere above in this thread.
CR is a measurement for the PCs to see how tough a monster is in comparison to the PCs. What CR cannot, however, is to compare the power of monsters. So while you still can compare the CRs of Larloch and Telamont with the PCs and then say Telamont is harder for the PCs to take down, this method of NPC comparison is far from accurate.
Anyway, you're right insofar that only an analysis of the NPCs' stat blocks can truly compare them to each other. Unfortunately WotC's 3.x stats are far too inconsistent (not only because of the change from 3.0 to 3.5), so you probably have to do the comparison with fan-made stats (a few of which are better than any official stats, anyway) that come close to either the NPC's ablities and powers we know from fluff or the short-stats presented in the official sourcebooks.
CR is almost purely irrelevant at high levels. As I said, the only way to really gauge their power in terms of CR is to carefully analyse their abilities and what they could do. Weaknesses in things like magical defenses are simply lethal in 3E and will make a character, however powerful Larloch should be, easily slain by PCs with the right mindset and spells. So this is why CR is relatively irrelevant, because it's how the stat block was thought out and what spells, abilities and defenses they have. Again, having not seen their stat blocks I can't say for sure, but saying that Telemont is more powerful as they gave him a CR of 37 doesn't mean anything by that point under 3rd edition.
This is what confused me, because why on earth you'd think that mattered if you are aware CR in 3rd edition means diddly squat is a mystery :P
In 4E terms however, you make Larloch a minimum of level 36 and he's practically untouchable - the games mathematics, his hit points and other factors simply render him genuinely impossible to fight without being ground down into beef jerky (in fact, simple suicide). This is why certain greater Gods aren't getting stats (like the Bane article, which was notable for having no stats for Bane) because there is a point that creatures beyond epic levels are simply unkillable. The only requirement Larloch would need if you wanted him to be genuinely invincible (as is the intention of him as I understand it) is simply an automatic saving throw each round before his turn starts (or during it). Vecnas ability to spend action points when PCs do immediately ends many other issues - especially if you give him a good amount of them.
If Larloch was level 34 and Telemont was level 37, it would be completely conclusive which was more powerful. Larloch would be very borderline for PCs to fight and Telemont being greater than level 35 would just be putting him beyond the maths that the PCs can attain.
Personally, I would based on the description of Larloch in this thread look heavily at Vecnas stat block from Open Grave. Larloch would possibly be a level lower or so, but I am unsure as to the general level of power Larloch would have in relation to Vecna. If Larloch is more powerful than Vecna (I don't know btw) than in 4E Terms that would make Larloch pretty much invincible to epic level PCs. So yeah, he'd definitely be one thing in the realms you would never pick a fight with unless you are suicidal or stupid.
Their CR vs. players is what is irrelevant, because while one monster may have a low CR it can be far more challenging than many things with a far higher CR based on what abilities it has.
Emphasize added
If this should be the case the monsters' stats are generally poorly done, because CR doesn't advance only by level/HD, templates, amount of wealth/possessions, but also by the appropriate amount for certain abilities/qualities. This is a reason why estimating might be the best way to calculate an epic monster's CR.
CR is almost purely irrelevant at high levels. As I said, the only way to really gauge their power in terms of CR is to carefully analyse their abilities and what they could do. Weaknesses in things like magical defenses are simply lethal in 3E and will make a character, however powerful Larloch should be, easily slain by PCs with the right mindset and spells. So this is why CR is relatively irrelevant, because it's how the stat block was thought out and what spells, abilities and defenses they have. Again, having not seen their stat blocks I can't say for sure, but saying that Telemont is more powerful as they gave him a CR of 37 doesn't mean anything by that point under 3rd edition.
This is what confused me, because why on earth you'd think that mattered if you are aware CR in 3rd edition means diddly squat is a mystery :P
Well, if you like I can give you two links with stats of both Larloch and Telamont (both done by JD) in order to compare them.
In 4E terms however, you make Larloch a minimum of level 36 and he's practically untouchable - the games mathematics, his hit points and other factors simply render him genuinely impossible to fight without being ground down into beef jerky (in fact, simple suicide). This is why certain greater Gods aren't getting stats (like the Bane article, which was notable for having no stats for Bane) because there is a point that creatures beyond epic levels are simply unkillable. The only requirement Larloch would need if you wanted him to be genuinely invincible (as is the intention of him as I understand it) is simply an automatic saving throw each round before his turn starts (or during it). Vecnas ability to spend action points when PCs do immediately ends many other issues - especially if you give him a good amount of them.
If Larloch was level 34 and Telemont was level 37, it would be completely conclusive which was more powerful. Larloch would be very borderline for PCs to fight and Telemont being greater than level 35 would just be putting him beyond the maths that the PCs can attain.
We were primarily talking about 3e, but I'm well aware of this in 4e.
Personally, I would based on the description of Larloch in this thread look heavily at Vecnas stat block from Open Grave. Larloch would possibly be a level lower or so, but I am unsure as to the general level of power Larloch would have in relation to Vecna. If Larloch is more powerful than Vecna (I don't know btw) than in 4E Terms that would make Larloch pretty much invincible to epic level PCs. So yeah, he'd definitely be one thing in the realms you would never pick a fight with unless you are suicidal or stupid.
Keep in mind that the level cap for this might be lvl 40. So Larloch should be somewhere on the lower end. Anyway, you might take a look in my Realms 4e NPCs thread to look if you'd agree/disagree with my take Larloch and Co's 4e level?
I almost flipped my lid, btw, when I saw the 'make Larloch 36 level...'
I was like 'WTF!?!?!, Vecna is only 35!
...
Then I finished reading your post... :embarrass
So, what level do you think they'd be in 4e? Personally, I can see both around 30-34 level Solo's.
Solo: about twice as powerful as Elite.
Elite: about twice as powerful as normal.
So (this is for those not familiar with 4e) 4 normal = 2 Elite = 1 Solo.
Ergo, 1 Solo = normal party of equal level.
I's most likely put them both at 32 level... the two comparisons we have right now is Szass Tam (30 level Elite) and an Archfey (31 level Solo).
Your thoughts?
Anyway, you might take a look in my Realms 4e NPCs thread to look if you'd agree/disagree with my take Larloch and Co's 4e level?
I like them.
Telamont Tanthul Level 31 Solo Artillery
Larloch Level 32 Solo Artillery (Leader)
So, what level do you think they'd be in 4e? Personally, I can see both around 30-34 level Solo's.
You can find both versions in my NPC thread (Larloch 32 solo, Telamont 30 solo) ;)
So (this is for those not familiar with 4e)
Okay, so elite monsters count as two standard monsters, solo as five. Elite monsters can have several 'companions', whether elite, standard, or minion. Solo guys are supposed to take down the PCs on their own, though they can as well be encountered with a few minions.
In theory it looks as follows:
Minion = Standard +8 lvls
Elite = Standard -4 lvls
Solo = Standard -9 lvls
e.g. Orcus is 33 Solo or 38 Elite or 42 Standard or 50 Minion
He (Vecna) is a god now, so it wouldn't be too far-fetched to say Larloch is the Faerûnian aspect of Vecna (although we know through the timelines - there are THREE worlds involved - that such is impossible). Definately a retcon, but if I was running 4e and needed stats for Larloch, I would use whatever is in Open Grave for Vecna.
After-all, both are DM uber-muffins, and should be nigh-unbeatable plot devices (and both just happen to be shrewd and powerful super-Liches). I use stats from well-known NPCs all the time for my own homebrew guys (rather then use the actual NPC), so I don't see why we need so many different stat-sets to describe similar concepts.
If there is any source that gives an indication of how powerful Larloch is roughly in relation to Vecna that would make things pretty easy. Personally on thinking about it, I would make Larloch a level 34 solo controller and probably copy heavily from aspects of Vecnas stats.
Anyway, you might take a look in my Realms 4e NPCs thread to look if you'd agree/disagree with my take Larloch and Co's 4e level?
I will later when I have the time. You could always just post them in this thread (as well as the 3E stat blocks) if you wanted. The levels sound a bit low (but it depends on what you're trying to do with them) given that by 30th level that makes Telemont an easy encounter - comparatively that is - and Larloch is just a standard encounter (by themselves mind, I would probably throw a whole bunch of undead and other things into there, including traps, magical wards and anything else I could think of: a genuine kitchen sink encounter).
) I agree that Larloch is a badass. His CR is the same as Aumvor's, and that fight would be a joke. But Telamont was never given stats. I know its not my place, but I think Telamont should be a higher level. I think you guys are right to compare abilities, but Telamont was never given any, so the only available comparison has to be level/CR. Larloch may have a pretty substantial bag of tricks, but whose to say that Telamont doesn't have just as many?That said...the 4th ed. monster manual does say that Telamont is an elite controller...and there is no way Larloch isn't a solo...
Anyway, I'm running a Faerun campagin with some buddies of mine. In the name of practicing monster creation, we custom made some of the Faerun crew. I'm a bit of a Netheril nerd, so I went ahead and did Telamont, Aumvor, Larloch, and Ioulam. I put Larloch as a level 32 Solo, Aumvor as a level 32 Elite, Telamont as a level 34 Elite, and Ioulam (in all his undead elder brain goodness) as a level 34 solo.
Thought I'd share, peace out.
0_0 Holy $H17...this forum is from...a year ago...oh dear...my 4$5 is late...