What is the Response toward Oblivion's KoW? : The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:35 pm

:lmao:

Tell me, was it ever a good idea to base your lich background info on D&D? And where does it say that Mannimarco is the first lich? Or that the term archlich appears in tes?

Mannimarco has been documented as being the first known lich in Nirn. Was he the first? Right now, all we can say is "until proven otherwise."

And what DarthRavanger said is pretty much right, TES liches are different than DnD liches. While somewhat similar, they are different. Also, you don't have to be a necromancer, powerful mages can too. Necromancy is pretty much taking a dead body, reanimating it with magic, and the practical and physical study of the body. Also, being the stereotypical kitten drowning bad guy is not a requirement to be a lich either. Those that chose to go down that path do it either to: protect something, continue research, tell Arkay to sod off (Manni is big on this), and increase their power.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:52 pm

It's not like he had a flying castle that turned people into zombies to conquer the world or something.

Well evil are the new cool.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 2:57 pm

:lmao:

Tell me, was it ever a good idea to base your lich background info on D&D? And where does it say that Mannimarco is the first lich? Or that the term archlich appears in tes?

oops, my bad I didn't base my lore off DnD I actually based it on the text you quoted. It's been a long time since I read it I tried to go off memory, usually I don't screw up that baddly.

I forgot that they were not bound to the fate of their souls.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:50 am

Honestly, I don't understand where the DnD dudes got the idea to use the word phylactery for such an item. I think they were just randomly using the thesaurus for the word "amulet."

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/phylactery. I do believe the original usage is the second definition:

The small leather case, containing biblical scrolls, worn by Jewish men at morning prayer; the tefilla.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:09 pm

Honestly, I don't understand where the DnD dudes got the idea to use the word phylactery for such an item. I think they were just randomly using the thesaurus for the word "amulet."

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/phylactery. I do believe the original usage is the second definition:

phylactery is actually Egyptian, its the urns they placed their organs into during mummification.

the term that applies to amulets came later, as many amulets are lockets and thus people would place things in there that remind them of loved ones, hence they store their heart in the amulet so its a phylactery in the sense it's containing a metaphoric organ.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 2:13 pm

phylactery is actually Egyptian, its the urns they placed their organs into during mummification.

No, that's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canopic_jar.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:40 pm

No, that's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canopic_jar.

Your absolutely correct, I got my ancienst civilizations mixed up. It's a greek/jewish thing. Back in the day they would wear those during jewish ceremonies and services and they would be filled with scriptures.

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:10 am

Your absolutely correct, I got my ancienst civilizations mixed up. It's a greek/jewish thing. Back in the day they would wear those during jewish ceremonies and services and they would be filled with scriptures.

... I posted a link and a quote and everything! You didn't read them. :sad:

» Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:41 pm

... I posted a link and a quote and everything! You didn't read them. :sad:

I did, the phylactery is the thing the greeks and the jews wore, not the jars