Jon vs. Raistlin
TrueDannyboy
Member Posts: 17
I saw a thread about Drizzt and Jon who would win. It seemed to me a pretty obvious outcome. But it got me thinking to other iconic D@D characters. I wonder who would win out of Raistlin (Right before he became a god) and Jon (At the height of his power)
Thoughts
Thoughts
2
Comments
Raist, on the other hand, fights Takhisis to a standstill and very nearly wins. If he had, he would have usurped her and taken her place as one of the prime gods of the setting, and head of the dark pantheon of Krynn. Now, I can't remember the details of the fight, but in my mind nearly succeeding a primordial deity of darkness and evil is a more noteworthy task than capturing a few skilled and famous, but mostly** mundane mortals.
*The Bhaalspawn had their soul ripped out, and has to give up a part of themselves in Spellhold during one of the dreams, IIRC.
**When Jon captures Charname, they're still mostly un-awakened.
Unless, I suppose, you count Irenicus the Shattered One as a canon incarnation? Then we're getting closer, but probably also not quite there.
It is when his brother returns fron the future and lets Raistlin know about what happens after Raistlins win when Raistlin sees his folly and makes things different (he doesnt lures Takhisis into the "trap", losing the fight)
They will use mostly the same protective spells, the same offensive/breach like spells, and the same damage/powerwords spells. Some spells rely on level ofc, like different kinds of dispelling and damaging spells, so should power/strenght be measured as character levels? Then it should be easy enough to say who's stronger - the one with the highest level. Or is there some other way to say who's stronger that isn't just purely subjective and emotionelly driven?
So, Irenicus is tapping into the tree to sap it's power, but what will he be able to actually do with that power? Does he get more spell slots, a higher caster level, more spells, NEW spells, faster casting speed or what?
(Sorry if I am derailing the thread, but I'm just curious what you guys think if this. I can create another thread about this if the OP or a mod thinks I'm stepping outside the topic. )
At the height of his power Raistlin (just before challenging Takhisis) would win - being able to challenge a god is something not taken lightly and Jon is unable to do this - although he has designs on becoming a god that is very different from challenging one on its own plane which Raistlin did quietly successfully - and for those that read the series (time of twins) knows he does ascend to become the new dark god of Krynn - actually to become the only god of Krynn in the end - something that Jon would not be able to do.
Even before challenging Takhisis - Raistlin as the Master of the Tower was a force to be reckoned with - with his powers he left burnt finger prints in his apprentice (Dalamar) that would never heal - probably one of the scenes I most remember from the book - which showed just how powerful he had become. Now at this point before his time travel adventures he is powerful beyond belief - it is somewhat hard to imagine Irecenus being that powerful (as my PC is not that powerful and we (the party of 6) took him down but then again we didn't face him in a mage battle). Raistlin before his time travel adventures and Jon at his height would be a challenging battle - not sure who would win in the end but Raistlin does have the staff of the magi and Jon doesn't but then again Raistlin does have that horrible cough still at this point while Irenicus is healthy.
I seem to recall Dragonlance having a much lower play level, but I also recall wish spells being rather high level, so maybe it balances out.
That said, when he defeated Takhisis I don't recall him casting any spells at her. He mostly taunted her to leave the abyss in her true form, stepped in as she left and locked the door behind her.
As an example, we have quite a few super powered archmages running around during the time frame of the games. Elminster, Khelben Blackstaff, Jon, Gromph Baenre, Alustriel Silverhand...all extremely powerful. How do we measure their strengths and compare them in an X vs Y matchup?
I wasn't disagreeing with you, simply asking if there was an objective criterion by which we could measure these characters. I know nothing about Dragonlance or how the characters and gods there rank in power. This Raistlin guy apparently ascended to godhood, but does that automatically mean that (in his mortal state) he'd beat every challenger to come his way? Jon certainly tried his best to ascend, and he nearly succeeded. So did Amelyssan.
In the "Exceptional Strength" thread people were talking about how a character with higher strength should always win a contest of strength, such as an arm wrestling match. But as you pointed out it's more complicated than pure stats alone. The guy with 18/70 Strength might be inexperienced with the tactics of arm wrestling (for example, he doesn't keep his arm close to his body, lowering the amount of power he can put into the struggle), allowing a more well versed 16 Strength character to defeat him. Said 16 Str guy continues to face challengers of varying skill, beating them with his knowledge of the game. But after a half hour of matches, his strength is drained and a relatively low strength challenger comes along (13 Str). The new guy is definitely weaker on paper, but he's fresh and full of energy which allows him to outlast and beat the 16 Str guy.
Going back to the mage discussion, I think that experience in battle is going to be a large determining factor. Raw intelligence or power doesn't mean as much when you don't know how to use it, or how your enemy might use theirs. That's why discussions like these are interesting to so many of us. Maybe there really is no good objective way to measure power. Maybe it really does just come down to the subjective. "In this book Wizard A did this and beat Big Bad X." "Well in this other book Wizard B used this strategy to defeat Monster Y." "You're both wrong, Wizard C would crush them all. They can do X and Y, which the other two would have no way to counter."
Hence this discussion. It's a matter of opinion, not a question of finding the right combination of variables to yield a definitive answer. You can argue for whatever you like, as long as you argue well; what you use in your argument is up to you, and practically anything you can think of.
These discussions aren't about a result, they're about an inspiring process. People read what other people think, and their opinion is shaped alongside it. In the end, they get not THE answer, but perhaps THEIR answer.
But then we come to the issue of mages and their power.
"If all mages are confined to use the same spells, casting them at usually the same speed and with the same limitations etc, how does one even measure "strenght" in a mage vs mage fight?
They will use mostly the same protective spells, the same offensive/breach like spells, and the same damage/powerwords spells. Some spells rely on level ofc, like different kinds of dispelling and damaging spells, so should power/strenght be measured as character levels? Then it should be easy enough to say who's stronger - the one with the highest level. Or is there some other way to say who's stronger that isn't just purely subjective and emotionelly driven?"
To ME it seems easier to use quantative measurements to value a warrior-type's power than a mage's, hence my question to begin with. But nevermind then, I guess this is a dead-end and I should just stop talking since noone else have really jumped in either.
You asking about how exactly Raistlin or Iernicus were made more powerful by their schemes. This is the sort of thing that is handled well in fiction and poorly in formal D&D. In fiction a wizard can become "so powerful" (whatever that means) that he can challenge gods or destroy civilizations. In the game, there aren't mechanics for that. Hell, in 1st edition, the gods (called Immortals back then) had 100% magic resistance and were immune to all damage except from +5 weapons. You could be a level 36 mage (the max under those rules) and it didn't matter, you couldn't touch a god. And 1st edition had what was probably the weakest gods (in 2ed, the Planescape manual openly stated at the beginning that the gods simply couldn't be beaten by mortals if the battle was happening in their own Realm; their powers were absolute).
But... the attending fiction always has some mage that fights the gods and almost wins, because that's a good story. It took a while for the mechanics to catch up with the fiction. The first stab at it happened in the Dark Sun setting, in the Dragon Kings book. It introduced Psionic Enchantments. The rules for them were really janky. You had to reach level 20+ as either a mage or a psion, and then dual class to the other class and reach level 20 again. Once you had mastered both magic and psionics, you could cast these things called psionic enchantments, which let you do magic on a scale that you see in the fiction, stuff that is way beyond the essentially tactical stuff you get in the Players Handbook. You could raise necropolises, alter geographic regions, dominate whole cities, etc. The preparation time on the more impressive ones was measured in days, sometime even years. While there was no one spell that said "you can fight gods" one of the overarching goals of the Dragon Kings was to become gods themselves, and that book explained the mechanism by which they could do this (it was done by casting lots of psionic enchantments).
Towards the end of 2nd ed, TSR published the High Level Campaigns book, which took the ideas from Dragon Kings, and generalized them to non-Dark Sun settings. Clerics and Mages of level 21+ could cast "True Dweomers," spells that could have epic level consequences (and very length preparation times). You could simulate Irenicus' plot using these rules. He spent years prepping the spell, and the actual casting time was measured in hours.
Of course, none of this matters much tactically, but those same rules also let you make less cosmic but more practical combat magic. These things aren't found in spell books, and are always unique to the archmage using them, and I'd say that these spells are what separate high level wizards from each other. Under these rules a 30th level wizard would be able to make much better True Dweomers than a 21st mage. They also aren't really represented in Baldur's Gate, except as a plot device.
For what it's worth , 3E also tried to recycle the concept in their Epic Level Handbook, using the Epic Spells rules. It was a broken mess, and players mostly used it to give themselves boring munchkin powers rather than do cool world changing magic.