Theocracy vs. Magocracy: who would win?

[Deadguy]

Lots of interesting points being made - all grist to the mill for future games!

On the point of the value of Raise Dead, I would suggest that it is more valuable than credited by some. It's real value is in returning to life leaders and other senior people who have fallen to the accidents of battle. Even under D&D rules, powerful people can fall more through accident than design - a large number of crits, a failed saving throw, a missed Spot check. But if you can bring these people back from the dead, even reduced in power, you have their insight, power and assistance again. When we consider that historical battles have been lost because of the chance deaths of important people, then this facility is sure worth having.

 

[The Furious Puffin]

IMHO It would seem whoever has the greatest number of mid to high level soldiers will win.

Why?

A high level fighter (16) is capable of slaughtering any number of low level troops, while they are unable to hit him (Isn't the rule that 20 is an auto hit and 1 an automatic miss an optional rule?) as he has AC 10+1 (Dex) +9 (Full plate) +5 (Magic/Hasted/Ring of Protection/Whatever) for AC 25. Even the toughest 1st level character is unable to hit him. However, he can decimated whole reigments in one round using PrCs like Master Samurai. (Cleave, 5-foot step, cleave, wash, rinse, repeat. If he teleported in and had expert tactican, he could have two cracks at everyone! A marching coloum of level one foot soldiers could be wiped out by one man in less than a second.)

A 9 level sorcerer can kill dozens of pikemens with a few fireballs. Or whole groups of clerics/mages

Futhermore at 20th level rogue with the right magic items has a Hide skill of 40. Even the most perceptive low-level guard cannot see him, and his is more than capable of killing anyone he gets the drop on (Ring of blinking expert tactician etc)

What such a war would come down to is the numbers of such mid-high level characters who are effectively immune to the "grunts" on either side, but can kill them with ease.

In that that theocray may have an advantage, because there high level characters can resurrect each other, but high level wizards can cuase enmourous amounts of damage.

However, I thing the mageocracy would win in the final count, becuase its leader, an Elven Level 10 Wizard/Incantrix, casts persistant time-stop and then kills every person in the other land, by recasting persistant time stop every 12 hours (unless that has been errated - but I don't think it has) and carpet bombing the world in meteor swarm.

 

[ThenHeCame]

Good Lord ya can tell we are geeks

Only on EN could you find a debated topic like this!

Long Live EN WORLD!

But back to the matter at hand.

I honestly think it's all a matter of fancy. The story telling is merely a fun way to see everyone's perspective. You want the clerics to win? Tell me how they do Gawd Damn it!

 

[LordMelkor{Talos}]

Well, one 20th level wizard can turn a tide of huge battle by casting few meteor swarms, which would devastate enemy morale.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Since you talk from Meteor Swarm:
Perhaps the effect will be very similar to a nuclear war? Total Annhilation of both sides, perhaps only a few survivors?

Imagine, a ill-worded wish here, several dozens summoned undeads whose summoner died in the wrong moment, uncontrolled constructs, summoned outsiders (who says the clerics are good? Chances are great that they are lawful neutral, and just one step, you have demons. Or another step, and you have some paladins...), meteor swarms devastating cities, armies out of control, Dragons unpleased with the outcome of certain events, the one or the other major artifact used, some divine interventions.
Maybe such a war would be the last war for a very long time...

Oh, but to another thing: Do you believe, that in the real world, it were only a few men and women who really "changed" the world, or was it the humanity at whole?
Was the French Revolution the result of a few guys at the right place, could only Napoleon be a powerful conquerer? Without Hitler, wasn`t there a Second World War?
Without Einstein, wouldn`t we have the relativistic theory?

At least two of the things I know some answers:
1) Einstein wasn`t the only one to develop this theory, there was at least one other person who thought of it - but Einstein was first to present it.
2) Here in Germany, the "doctrine", if you wish, is that the 2WW, and the genocide against the jewish people is a collective guilty - this does also mean that if there wasn`t hitler, than someone else would "have done the job".

I tend to believe that it is the humanity at whole that makes the decision what happens in history, not single persons.
The interesting question is: Does this apply to Dungeons & Dragons? If yes: Maybe than it is not a question of the high level heroes, it is a question of the common people.
If no (hey! Do you know any high level heroes?): Than it might not only be important if there are any high level heroes, it is also important to know WHO it is.

 

[Al]

Morale and Mage-Squads

One element that has been overlooked is the effect on morale. Now, the clerical troops may have better morale than the wizards because of x,y and z, but on the field these will matter relatively little. What WILL matter is field morale: and if anything is going to get you down, it a fireball whamming into the squad next door, eliminating it (perhaps the sergeant not dying) and half your friends being barbecued. This will cause you to run, no matter how nice your leaders are.

The clerics don't use the same whizzbang type magic (flamestrike is unlikely to be cast en masse to the high-level) and hence cannot devastate enemy morale in the same way.

The other aspect being ignored in the devastating effect of 'mage-squads': small groups of low-level magi how just pick off the enemy commanders. A 1st level wizard is probably not a rarity, and if you give them specialist evocation training and some tactics, then you could form small units of (say) 50 wizards. Now get each wizard to cast a magic missile at the enemy general. He's down. Repeat and replicate. Clerics cannot do this: there first long-range offensive spell in sound burst, which has only a range of Close.

So more justification for the Magocracy.

Answering the point about lawful good restrictions: perhaps, but who says the wizards are evil? Lawful neutral wizards could easily keep their populace happy and even evil leaders realise that a happy population is a good fighting force: the Germans under the Nazis enjoyed the highest living standard in the war of any European power (although the conquered lands may be different). And of course there is more than just alignment to use as a tool: populist proganda and religious satire sates the masses and elites respectively, and can be dispensed by bards.

Ridcully: Interesting point about individuals, but I believe you underestimate them. On the field, effective commanders can make a huge difference. Wellington once said of Napoleon (despite being enemies): 'his presence on the field made the difference of 40,000 men'

 

[Rhialto]

You want my opinion...

Depends on the Theocracy, and depends on the Magocracy...

 

[Darklone]

Re: Morale and Mage-Squads

One element that has been overlooked is the effect on morale. ...
A 1st level wizard is probably not a rarity, and if you give them specialist evocation training and some tactics, then you could form small units of (say) 50 wizards. Now get each wizard to cast a magic missile at the enemy general. H

Al, I don't agree. Magic Missile has a range of ? Medium. Give me 20 archers and they kill those wizards before one gets close. And what happens if one medium level cleric protects the general or that one happens to have a shield brooch?

Everyone here talks about devastating effect of fireballs... Bring on some nice catapults and compare. Fireball's range is not sooooo good compared with some siege engines. Neither is the damage or the damage area. So you may easily have lots of killed mages with a good shot that didn't cast one spell.

About the tight formations: Sure the fighters will destroy any enemy unit with loose formation in melee ... if they get close. Which they will not. Skirmishers are skirmishers. They won't just stand there and wait till the tight formations whack them to pieces.

 

[Rhialto]

And the magocracy won't have those same siege engines because...

 

[clockworkjoe]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but siege engines were mostly used for sieges since they can't really hit moving objects. Besides, a big rock could at most kill a few soldiers. They're just rocks not exploding bombs.