Theocracy vs. Magocracy: who would win?
- Thread starter uv23
- Start date
Taren Nighteyes
First Post
I would have side with the Theocracy on this one.
Although I do love mages, there are just too many benefits the Theocracy would have.
1. Healing
2. Overwhelming public (worshippers) support
3. Combat ability in addition to spells
4. Leadership - wise and charismatic!
5. A desire to win the war, not just the individual battles (A better strategic - wisdom - feel for the long term desired outcome.
Mind you, the mages may kick the Theocracy in the teeth in more than a couple of battles.
The battle begins. The mages throw fireballs, meteor swarms, magic missiles and the like. They pretty much kick some butt. Later, same battle, the clerics have healed the wounded, the paladins have regrouped their forces and the mages are out of spells.
Just my opinion, of course.
Taren Nighteyes
Although I do love mages, there are just too many benefits the Theocracy would have.
1. Healing
2. Overwhelming public (worshippers) support
3. Combat ability in addition to spells
4. Leadership - wise and charismatic!
5. A desire to win the war, not just the individual battles (A better strategic - wisdom - feel for the long term desired outcome.
Mind you, the mages may kick the Theocracy in the teeth in more than a couple of battles.
The battle begins. The mages throw fireballs, meteor swarms, magic missiles and the like. They pretty much kick some butt. Later, same battle, the clerics have healed the wounded, the paladins have regrouped their forces and the mages are out of spells.
Just my opinion, of course.
Taren Nighteyes
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
Well, Paladins have an "Aura of Courage". And they are immune to "fear effects". The Bonus of "Aura of Courage" does apply against Intimidation Attempts. So, if some Paladins are under the troops, this will greatly increase the morale. (though it does not protect against the 5d6 or more points of damage
)Tactics? I can imagine that this is a fighter/warrior ability. But it can be argumented that this would be a knowledge skill (no fighter actually has knowledge skill as class skill
), so a wizard of 1st level might be able to get at least 4 ranks.Wizards need training, and if they did not knew there would be a war, it might be that not all of them knew magic missile. (So, they would pay 200 gold pieces to each wizard to learn the spell)
And Wizard is a "hero" class - perhaps they are a bit rarer than we assume (but so will be paladins, clerics and so on)...
Vacuum Elemental
First Post
Just wanted to say you all have very good ideas and I'd love to publish some of them in our Timeline product line.
We are always looking for new
Prestige Governments
Technologies
Wonders
Lands
Resources
Military Units
Mass Magic
Civilizations
We will purchase freelance work, and we'd love TIMELINE to become a standard all d20 publishers can adopt. After all, why should campaign books be limited to essays of background material for DMs? Our system presents the same information but also lets every player use it for their own fantasy civ building games.
It sounds like many of you are obviously interested in creating fantasy civs. Why not give our system a try and crunch the numbers d20 style?
http://www.d20timeline.com
We are always looking for new
Prestige Governments
Technologies
Wonders
Lands
Resources
Military Units
Mass Magic
Civilizations
We will purchase freelance work, and we'd love TIMELINE to become a standard all d20 publishers can adopt. After all, why should campaign books be limited to essays of background material for DMs? Our system presents the same information but also lets every player use it for their own fantasy civ building games.
It sounds like many of you are obviously interested in creating fantasy civs. Why not give our system a try and crunch the numbers d20 style?
http://www.d20timeline.com
Imperialus
Explorer
the problem with healing spells is they can only affect those who have at least 1 HP. Now if the armies are made up of mostly commoners and warriors a single sword blow can drop most of them to negative hit points. I mean the strength bonus of even the weakest earth elemental will kill a D4 HP character without even rolling for damage. Most anyone who is dropped to negative HP's would bleed out before the battle was over.
Oh and Vacuum Elemental, that sourcebook of your's looks really interesting. As soon as I get my hands on a credit card I'll buy it.
Oh and Vacuum Elemental, that sourcebook of your's looks really interesting. As soon as I get my hands on a credit card I'll buy it.
Last edited:
Darklone:
You're thinking out of context. The battlefield is chaotic, and the archers would not simply be able to happily shoot down the magi. They may be distracted, by say a frontal assault, enemy archer fire or the like. Shield Brooch is difficult to answer, granted, but that can be dispelled by one of the higher-level opposing wizards.
Catapults are siege engines, not field artillery. Effective field artillery did not really appear until the 17th century at the Battle of Vienna when the Austrians turned back a Turkish army. Siege engines were almost useless against a mobile foe, and even if hit could only kill one or two. And the morale effect of being hit by a rock is not as shaking as a strange man in a long robe chanting some words, waving his arms and *wham* half your buddies are toast.
Regarding skirmishers: Ok, so they run. But then call in the cavalry and a withdrawal turns into a rout, which turns in a bloodbath. If they reform formation, they get fireballed.
Taren Nighteyes:
1. Granted, but orders to dispatch wounded enemies circumvent this problem.
2. Perhaps, but not strictly. Bardic propaganda and satire can be equally as effective. Read the virtuoso greater calumny effect. And of course the wizards are likely to have better economic admin, and hence better living standards- more loyal populace? Most people are materialistic, not ideological.
3. Moot point. The number of actual clerics on the field, as has been discussed, is likely to be insignificant compared with the number of grunts, which their fighting prowess is inferior to.
4. Arguable. Whatever happened to Intelligent (wizards) and Charismatic (bards/sorcerors). Powerful speeches by high-level bards or sorcerors written by genius-level speechwriters may give better interpersonal leadership, and strategic planning is likely to be better on the side of the wizards: higher Int and fewer moral restrictions.
5. Again, moot point. Intelligence can be long-term as well, and individual battles turn wars more often than not, particularly in medieval/fantasy settings.
Mustrum_Ridcully: Aura of courage is fine, but historically even crack troops would run before they suffered more than about one-third casualties, even from ordinary weapons. Conscripts would often run simply if charged. Seeing colleagues decimated in a fireball and not even understanding a) what's going on or b) just how powerful the enemy wizards are is going to shatter the morale of even hardened troops, paladin or no.
Tactics- is indeed a knowlege skill. Knowledge (War) from S&F
Wizards are 'hero' class, but only a few regiments of around 50 are required to turn the battle. The magic missile argument is a good one, but realistically, how many wizards do NOT take MM? A large magocracy could probably churn out around 20 such regiments. And of course the theocrats ignore such arguments with relation to the supposed hordes of clerics and paladins...
You're thinking out of context. The battlefield is chaotic, and the archers would not simply be able to happily shoot down the magi. They may be distracted, by say a frontal assault, enemy archer fire or the like. Shield Brooch is difficult to answer, granted, but that can be dispelled by one of the higher-level opposing wizards.
Catapults are siege engines, not field artillery. Effective field artillery did not really appear until the 17th century at the Battle of Vienna when the Austrians turned back a Turkish army. Siege engines were almost useless against a mobile foe, and even if hit could only kill one or two. And the morale effect of being hit by a rock is not as shaking as a strange man in a long robe chanting some words, waving his arms and *wham* half your buddies are toast.
Regarding skirmishers: Ok, so they run. But then call in the cavalry and a withdrawal turns into a rout, which turns in a bloodbath. If they reform formation, they get fireballed.
Taren Nighteyes:
1. Granted, but orders to dispatch wounded enemies circumvent this problem.
2. Perhaps, but not strictly. Bardic propaganda and satire can be equally as effective. Read the virtuoso greater calumny effect. And of course the wizards are likely to have better economic admin, and hence better living standards- more loyal populace? Most people are materialistic, not ideological.
3. Moot point. The number of actual clerics on the field, as has been discussed, is likely to be insignificant compared with the number of grunts, which their fighting prowess is inferior to.
4. Arguable. Whatever happened to Intelligent (wizards) and Charismatic (bards/sorcerors). Powerful speeches by high-level bards or sorcerors written by genius-level speechwriters may give better interpersonal leadership, and strategic planning is likely to be better on the side of the wizards: higher Int and fewer moral restrictions.
5. Again, moot point. Intelligence can be long-term as well, and individual battles turn wars more often than not, particularly in medieval/fantasy settings.
Mustrum_Ridcully: Aura of courage is fine, but historically even crack troops would run before they suffered more than about one-third casualties, even from ordinary weapons. Conscripts would often run simply if charged. Seeing colleagues decimated in a fireball and not even understanding a) what's going on or b) just how powerful the enemy wizards are is going to shatter the morale of even hardened troops, paladin or no.
Tactics- is indeed a knowlege skill. Knowledge (War) from S&F
Wizards are 'hero' class, but only a few regiments of around 50 are required to turn the battle. The magic missile argument is a good one, but realistically, how many wizards do NOT take MM? A large magocracy could probably churn out around 20 such regiments. And of course the theocrats ignore such arguments with relation to the supposed hordes of clerics and paladins...
reiella
Explorer
Hmm, wouldn't weigh too heavily on clerics being more charismatic etc. Not even really paladins either in practice.
I mean, after all, Sorcerers will tend to just have higher Charisma since that's their only 'class critical' stat to worry about.
Healing magic I don't causing too much difference either way (at least not when compared to the rather yicky destructive force available to mages in general).
The higher level of clerics abound would kinda have to imply that there were a similiar number of mages around (at least to make it reasonably fair). The larger numbers of mages tends to generate larger ammounts of massive area damage, while a larger number of clerics produces a slightly more resilent fighting force.
5000 gp for a true res also is a bit troublesome (Although compared to the 5000 xp for a Wizard to Wish someone alive isn't much), the clerical individuals hold a greater advantage in recovering from death (mages need to have access to Clone so that would be out of the way fo a while).
Recovery does take time however, and the mages are capable of keeping tabs on the body, they can prevent it from being raised if necessary (1 minute for Raise Dead, 10 for Resurrection,10 for True Res), even with aid of Sanctuary what tends to be the higher save for mages?
I just tend to think/feel that the mages would gain a rather immense advantage in logistics (Teleport) and stealth (Invis). It's really that advantage I see being deciding for mages though.
Priests tend to accel at more defensive measures (Glyph of Warding, etc), although the wall spells can be just as useful.
I also don't tend to think that Fire Ball would be the 'best' in a war type environment... Flaming Sphere would be able to deal alot more damage to conventional troops.
[ Edit Fixed Fire Bal(l) spelling ]
I mean, after all, Sorcerers will tend to just have higher Charisma since that's their only 'class critical' stat to worry about.
Healing magic I don't causing too much difference either way (at least not when compared to the rather yicky destructive force available to mages in general).
The higher level of clerics abound would kinda have to imply that there were a similiar number of mages around (at least to make it reasonably fair). The larger numbers of mages tends to generate larger ammounts of massive area damage, while a larger number of clerics produces a slightly more resilent fighting force.
5000 gp for a true res also is a bit troublesome (Although compared to the 5000 xp for a Wizard to Wish someone alive isn't much), the clerical individuals hold a greater advantage in recovering from death (mages need to have access to Clone so that would be out of the way fo a while).
Recovery does take time however, and the mages are capable of keeping tabs on the body, they can prevent it from being raised if necessary (1 minute for Raise Dead, 10 for Resurrection,10 for True Res), even with aid of Sanctuary what tends to be the higher save for mages?
I just tend to think/feel that the mages would gain a rather immense advantage in logistics (Teleport) and stealth (Invis). It's really that advantage I see being deciding for mages though.
Priests tend to accel at more defensive measures (Glyph of Warding, etc), although the wall spells can be just as useful.
I also don't tend to think that Fire Ball would be the 'best' in a war type environment... Flaming Sphere would be able to deal alot more damage to conventional troops.
[ Edit Fixed Fire Bal(l) spelling ]
Last edited:
People wouldn't be bunched up in battle anymore then they are in modern warfare. And a mage getting into position to fireball a group would be just as dangerous for them. Marching in hordes across open fields just wouldn't exist, sorry. There would be much more small unit tactics and far less mass hordes. A higher level fighter or Cleric would be the tank and high level mages the artillery and bombers. You need to see the enemy to target effectively and every soldier would have a smokestick or two along to confuse targeting. Teleport raids behind enemy lines wouldn't be any more common then wind walk raids. With wind walk a group can move at 60mph through the air, that's plenty good for lightning raids.
Any discussion of mass combat without considering the Reality Maelstrom spell is missing something. If the wizards are high enough level to cast that spell, mass combat in the open against them is virtually hopeless. When you consider the range, AOE and types of saves required, it would be massively devastating. If they can enlarge the spell, then its even worse. This single 7th level wizard spell could wipe out VAST quantities of forces very quickly. In fact, the area of effect is so large that the spell is almost too dangerous to cast in most situations that an adventuring party would face (plus you loose all the loot ).
).Similar Threads
