He is neither a king who is a lich nor does he exclusively rule over liches. In fact, they probably make up a minority of his army.
Guess we have to add “lying” to Arthas’s long list of crimes.
1 Like
Arthas had nothing to do with the Lich King being called the Lich King.
7 Likes
Dude straight-up psychologically murdered Ner’zhul in his mind palace. At that point, he could have changed the name if he really wanted to be more honest about his role in undead society.
Without honesty, we are nothing.
You’re a paladin. You understand.
Rule of cool. Like how everything else is dictated in this story’s plot
Oh, so you’re posting while high. My mistake.
4 Likes
Kil’jaeden turned Ner’zhul’s followers into undead liches. And since he was the leader of them he just became the Lich King. It’s just a name and it works, no need to change it.
9 Likes
He basically is a Lich though. He’s undead and he’s an exceptionally powerful necromancer (especially Arthas). He just doesn’t resemble classical depiction of a Lich, which is closer to Kel’Thuzad’s appearance. And he gave to himself the title of King, for he was the greatest of them all… maybe not so much Bolvar, but what did you want him to change it to? Lich Prince? The Necromancer Formerly Known As The King Of Lich? Actually, that last one has a nice ring to it…
5 Likes
By that loose definition any unholy death knight is a lich because they use necromancy and are undead.
Arthas doesn’t have his soul bound to a phylactery, which is the definition of what makes a lich. Because liches’ souls and bodies are separate, they can choose the physical form they take, and the death of their physical body doesn’t kill them unless the phylactery is also destroyed. Arthas never bound his soul, thus his death atop ICC was permanent.
stop trying to make me divulge the location of my phylactery brah
- arthas
– jk a schizophrenic moron
1 Like
I found it I think it’s called frostmourn.
1 Like
yeah, it was frostmourne, wasn’t it
The Lich King as an entity is composed of Arthas Menethil, Kel’thuzad, and Ner’zul, as body, spirit, and mind
The Lich portion comes from Kel’thuzad as a racial
none of this wuold mater if intregander wresling where aloud, if so 2belts becky linch woudl roll him up 4 teh 3 coutn n b crowned teh NEW linch king
1 Like
What the hell is this!?!
Yes, they indeed are. And as the creature Arthas became was by far the most powerful among them, you can see why they called him “King” (though from recollection, Ner’zhul held the title first even when he didn’t have a body–he was just a soul attached to the Helm of Domination when he became the Lich King).
Like with any kind of fantasy creature, there’s never going to be consistent rules and lore across all depictions. Lich don’t necessarily require a phylactery to be defined as one, though that’s something commonly associated with them and as others have already pointed out, Frostmourne is basically a phylactery in a roundabout manner.
Blizzard has always played fast and loose with the lore and depiction of fantasy creatures anyway so common definitions aren’t always going to fit.
1 Like
Lyin Arthas, crooked Sylvanas, low-energy Illidan and little Jaina!
I’m confused by this thread.
Lore states:
Kil’jaeden the Deceiver created the Lich King from the spirit of the orc shaman Ner’zhul to raise an undead army to weaken Azeroth in preparation for the Burning Legion’s invasion. Initially trapped within the Frozen Throne with Frostmourne, the Lich King eventually betrayed Kil’jaeden and merged with the human Arthas Menethil.
So what is there to argue/complain/accuse?
2 Likes
…does it have to be exclusive?
1 Like
Becaus he is a lich and a king? A lich is like a really powerful undead, and he rules over the undead…
2 Likes
Gunther Arcanus is considered a lich and he doesn’t have a phylactery. I don’t think the phylactery ownership counts as some kind of absolute qualifier.
2 Likes