<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote">Quote</div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">So Wights are like Vampires, only dumber and not ever sparkly?</blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div>Essentially, though they create new undead by using their energy drain to weaken enemies and their slam attack to kill enemies (who then raise as wights in 1d4 turns), rather than using a vampire's bite. Other differences include being unaffected by sunlight and having none of the weaknesses that vampires have (over and above their undead weaknesses, that is). They don't even<em>need</em>to drain the life out of living creatures to continue existing or to remain active, so they could be stored for any amount of time and be just as dangerous when they're released as they were when they were initially stored (or even more dangerous, thanks to the Evolved Undead template from Libris Mortis). ;)<br/><br/>But it's this line..."Spawn are under the command of the wight that created them and remain enslaved until its death."...that is the most interesting. Feasibly, one wight could control all of the wights that he created (and all of the wights they create, and so on), without an HD or population limit, as long as that wight is specific with the commands it gives the wights it created. And since they have an intelligence score (unlike zombies), they can be given fairly complex instructions. So keeping them in an area is no more difficult than having the first wight command his underlings to command their underlings (and so on) to "Wait here until you receive further instructions." And yes, as Wren realized, killing the first wight would mean that control of all wights would be passed down to the second generation of wights, and depending on a few factors, could allow for some less-intelligent wights to use their newfound freedom to become bands of roving killers, while others may see the wisdom in laying low, at least at first.