Who could beat Xykon?

[Obnoxious Hydra]

Who do you guys think could beat Xykon?
Also, permanently or not. Beat him in combat, and destroy him in combat. Not really taking the phylactery into account here.

I'm just going to get some obvious ones out the way...

- The Snarl. Because obviously.

- A god. Excluding Banjo and Giggles, maybe Banjhulu. Xykon might have a chance against the Dark One or the Elven gods though, as technically their mortals who rose to power, so they might be able to be killed more easily than the 'true' gods.

- Ghost Martyrs of the Sapphire Guard. On his own, Xykon was being slaughtered. With the help and advice of RC, both of them lasted a little longer but would have been killed anyway if it weren't for Miko.

And, going to throw in my own suggestions...

- Redcloak and Jirix. I'd imagine Redcloak's power is nearly onpar with Xykon, and if he was being supported by Jirix (who's probably relatively compotent) he might be able to finish off Xykon after a while.

- Darth V. I mean, true Darth V, with all three souls spiced.

- Tarquin? Unlikely, but if he got in a few good hits in he might be able to take him down.

[LudiDrizzt]

- Redcloak and Jirix. I'd imagine Redcloak's power is nearly onpar with Xykon, and if he was being supported by Jirix (who's probably relatively compotent) he might be able to finish off Xykon after a while.

Xykon has at least 10 levels on Redcloak. Redcloak could never straight-up take him in a caster vs. caster fight, not even if Jirix tanks the energy drains first.


- Darth V. I mean, true Darth V, with all three souls spiced.

Would require a complete departure from V's character to work. Besides, he was always a few will-saves from losing that power. One more save wouldn't have made a difference.


- Tarquin? Unlikely, but if he got in a few good hits in he might be able to take him down.

Tarquin vs. Xykon would go just about as well as Roy vs. Xykon went.

[Gift Jeraff]

Been discussed plenty of times--we now know that Redcloak is exactly 17th level and Xykon is 21+. 28+ if you don't wanna assume he has some sort of magic rod. (I forgot the exact argument.) So, he's not really close to being on par.

The archfiends probably could beat him, but I'm going to guess that Xykon's downfall will be a mixture of the OOTS, the MitD, possibly Redcloak, and possibly other external factors.

[MReav]

Been discussed plenty of times--we now know that Redcloak is exactly 17th level and Xykon is 21+. 28+ if you don't wanna assume he has some sort of magic rod. (I forgot the exact argument.) So, he's not really close to being on par.

His ability to cast Maximized Energy Drain would require several Epic feats.

[Obnoxious Hydra]

Xykon has at least 10 levels on Redcloak. Redcloak could never straight-up take him in a caster vs. caster fight, not even if Jirix tanks the energy drains first.


Oh, woah, really? Didn't realise Xykon was that much more powerful than Redcloak. I guess Redcloak only beats him in subtle-lich-controlling.



Would require a complete departure from V's character to work. Besides, he was always a few will-saves from losing that power. One more save wouldn't have made a difference.

Oh yeah, of course it'd ruin V's character, but I'm just thinking up hypothetical situations here. I doubt they'd ever happen, or have any reason or possibility to happen, I'm just trying to think up stuff.

And, not sure if I'm taking in the possibility of him losing the soul splices into account. If there was, for no reason, no chance of V losing the extra souls, then I'd warrant it would be a very close fight even if V lost. If the possibility of V losing the extra souls was still present, making him true to the comics Darth V, then... meh.



Tarquin vs. Xykon would go just about as well as Roy vs. Xykon went.

Eh, good point. Most melee fighters are probably off the table then. I guess the only reason Roy 'beat' Xykon the first time was due to Xykon not really expecting it (oh, and managing to throw Xykon into a giant rune o' doom) and I doubt he'd make the same mistake again.

[CharityB]

I feel as if you have to take into the account that the souls can leave if Xykon distracts V's concentration sufficiently. I mean, that's a pretty big vulnerability in the system and if you take it out, you're essentially talking about a different character.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I am fairly certain that the Order of the Stick all working together, as opposed to Roy trying to solo him, could take him. Maybe at this point, definitely by the end of the "campaign", because that's how it's going to end. I'm fairly certain that working together as a team to fight him is going to be kind of a big deciding factor, because what's a D&D story (or any fantasy story with a six-man ensemble protagonist team) without a lesson about teamwork?

[Kish]

The creature in the darkness might be able to.

[JadeVamp]

Tarquin may just win that fight by the virtue of being the single most insanely prepared person ever. Seriously, he may trump batman in that regard. If Tarquin had time to plan and manipulate some adventurers into attacking Xykon for help he would win. However, if they just met on the street and duked it out.... yeah, Xykon all the way.

On a side note, the MitD would probably kick Xykon's bony butt, but I can't really see him fighting much. He's too nice.

[MesiDoomstalker]

On a side note, the MitD would probably kick Xykon's bony butt, but I can't really see him fighting much. He's too nice.

There are 2 ways MitD will ever defeat anyone:


By accident (see Miko, Haley, and Belkar)
He comes to some moral and emotional realization (started by O-chul's influence) and turns on Team Evil and throws a class-A temper tantrum.

[Gift Jeraff]

On a side note, the MitD would probably kick Xykon's bony butt, but I can't really see him fighting much. He's too nice.If Xykon were to kill O-Chul, I can see the MitD getting out of the darkness to kick Xykon's ass.

:roach: He has come here to eat stew and kick ass...

[ti'esar]

Tarquin may just win that fight by the virtue of being the single most insanely prepared person ever. Seriously, he may trump batman in that regard. If Tarquin had time to plan and manipulate some adventurers into attacking Xykon for help he would win. However, if they just met on the street and duked it out.... yeah, Xykon all the way.

On a side note, the MitD would probably kick Xykon's bony butt, but I can't really see him fighting much. He's too nice.

I don't know why people keep viewing Tarquin as some kind of omniscient god just because he's genre savvy (and he's not even quite as genre savvy as he thinks). I certainly see no evidence in the comic that his preparedness-level rivals Batman's.

[SocioWrath]

Seriously, Belkar's Cat... Think about it... :smallwink:

[stormtemplar]

If Xykon were to kill O-Chul, I can see the MitD getting out of the darkness to kick Xykon's ass.

:roach: He has come here to eat stew and kick ass...

and he's all out of stew.

yeah, MITD has been shown to take miko (Who was clearly quite high level) and belkar's attack (Who's in the double digits level wise) without getting hurt at all. He'd win a straight fight with ease, though I think his will save is low.

[skaddix]

Yeah MITD is the only known character who could fight Xykon 1 v 1 and likely win.

[EmeraldFire]

The archfiends probably could beat him, but I'm going to guess that Xykon's downfall will be a mixture of the OOTS, the MitD, possibly Redcloak, and possibly other external factors.

I agree that the Archfiends would be the most likely to beat Xykon in a fight. Especially since I consider them as one person (I think the Giant commented at one point in the book that he tried to make them move and talk like one person). In this case, it's 3v1 with those 3 being very powerful lords from the lower planes.

The MITD is a possibility, that's true, but there are some problems I see with the MITD. The first is that as we've seen in Start of Darkness, his Will save is nothing that Xykon cannot overcome. The other problem I see is motivation. I agree that it is likely that the death of O'Chul could get him to fight, but we know the MITD is strong enough to get out of that box and he didn't help (combat-wise) during the Darth V and O'Chul vs Xykon fight.

I have no doubt that the MITD is superior to Xykon in terms of physical cababilities, but we don't know what his Spell Resistance is like and we know that Xykon can overcome his Will save. So I think that the odds of the MITD beating Xykon in a straight-up fight are not too likely.

[Tergon]

Well, there's also assuming that we are talking about a straight toe-to-toe fight with Xykon and another character. Xykon uses his powers like a sledgehammer of raw arcane might, which is effective almost all the time... almost. When thrown into a situation he can't smash his way out of, he does less well. Roy destroyed Xykon's physical body by hurling him into Dorukan's Gate. The Ghost-Martyrs of the Sapphire Guard nearly destroyed him completely at Soon's Gate. Lord only knows what protects the final two. And then there's the Monster trumping Xykon's rage by teleporting V an O-Chul to safety, and Redcloak making a false phylactory...

I'm not saying that anyone we've met in the comic would find it easy to defeat Xykon. In a straight fight, I'm not sure anyone we've seen short of the Gods themselves would stand a chance. But, well... if Xykon's going to win a fair fight, then only an idiot would fight fair. He can be tricked, he can be outsmarted, and there are ways to trump his near-invulnerability, such as hurling him into Dorukan's Gate.
Take any of the characters with the brains and the gumption to set it up, and give them a good enough reason to do it... Tarquin, Roy, Haley, Redcloak, I'd be willing to accept nearly any of them could possibly defeat Xykon, if only through sheer luck. They might even die in the process, but it's still perfectly possible they'd pull it off.

[Snails]

A team like the Stick could beat Xykon to death like a helpless kitten if in an Anti-Magic Field, in spite of being 5 or 10 or 15 level behind. It would not be easy to close like that, but Xykon has exactly the kind of mindset that would fail to see that move coming. He, like the less astute incarnation of V., is prone to see raw magical power as unstoppable and would not anticipate a spellcaster denying himself as a useful means to an end. V, however, has seen up close how Antimagic plus physical might play out.

[Chronos]

Jirix is too low-level to be even relevant vs. Xykon (he wasn't able to turn any of the ghost-martyrs), but that's OK, because Redcloak could solo him. Yes, in general, Xykon has much more raw power, but in this specific case, Redcloak has an answer to everything Xykon can throw at him, and also has things that Xykon can't easily answer.

The silver dragon that Xykon eventually zombified for use as a mount had Xykon and Redcloak seriously worried, while they were fighting it, and they only won through a stroke of luck. So that's a contender, too, though Xykon may well have gained a level or two since then.

At the same time, though, they seem to imply that Monster-San could have easily taken care of that same dragon. So we should probably assume that Monster-San would be a serious threat to Xykon, too.

And speaking of dragons, if she were still alive, Mamma Black Dragon could use the same tactics she used versus V, to good effect: Anti-Magic Field plus Being a Big Damn Dragon is a pretty potent combo.

[thereaper]

You really think Xykon isn't prepared for an AMF? Really? Really?

The guy has a magic ring that protects him from his own meteor swarm, just in case he gets grappled. He has epic magic (which can overcome AMFs, by the way).

Of course, the real question is how on earth you would get Xykon into an AMF and keep him there. Good luck with that one.

[King of Nowhere]

Let's see as far as individuals go

- the ancient silver dragon that eventually became zombified did mop the floor with xykon and redcloak and they won with sheer luck.

- also mama black dragon was very powerful, she can probably ddish out any saving throw xykon an require from her and has way too many hd for level draining to be effective. I'm not certain she could win, but she at least has a chance.
btw, antimagic field would at least disrupt non-epic spellcasting. and xykon don't have thaqt many epic slots.

- tarquin may be able to. we don't know how high level he is, but he is very resourceful and has plenty of resources. And xykon is optimized to figth spellcasters, not figther tipes. If they were equal levels, I'd put my money on tarquin, the reasons i made above should be enough to balance tier difference.

- redcloak has no chance in a direct figth, but if he can prepare accurately, especially considering xykon is prone to blast first and dispel second, I would give redccloak a chance.

- we know too little of aarindarius to predict an outcome of that, even if i doubt aarindarius could be higher than xykon and lich immunities would probably give X the upper hand.

- dorukan and soon both had a fair shot at him. Lirian would have, if she had been more prepared.

- the mitd could make it,but i doubt it. I don't think he can fly, so xykon would just have to stay out of reach. and the mitd has probably a bad will save that xykon can exploit.



As for parties...
- give them another couple of levels and some weapons better at hurting him, and the oots would be a serious trouble for xykon alone.

- tarquin's full party is probably capable of killing xykon.

- any sufficiently numbering gang of sufficiently high level guys could do it. it's just amatter of numbers.

[Iamyourking]

Trying to conclusively say that the Archfiends could beat him is difficult; since there isn't really any way of telling exactly how powerful they are. I've seen statlines for various versions of archfiends giving challenge ratings from 22 to 84, and it's possible, if unlikely, they are below even that and are just Pit Fiends/Balors/Ultraloths with delusions of grandeur.

[Morty]

I'm going to agree with those saying the Order working as a team or the MiTD - possibly both, if what O-Chul said sinks in and he helps the OoTS agains Xykon. Redcloak can't really solo Xykon even if he wanted to, but he would definetly make a difference if someone else fought him. In fact, I have this pet theory of mine that Xykon might be brought down by Redcloak betrying him at a crucial moment, which would tip the scales.

[ClothSword]

Haley could shoot him in the knee ^_^

[FlawedParadigm]

I'm curious about the fact that I keep seeing MitD's will save brought up because we've ("we" being SoD readers) seen it fail exactly once. We don't actually have evidence Xykon didn't just get lucky on that one, just like lizard-V did with the Suggestion spam against the young adult black dragon. MitD could have rolled a 1 the first time and even Xykon doesn't know how lucky he got there. It could even be that if that spell causes a second saving throw ever, X will be in for a nasty shock.

[t209]

Haley could shoot him in the knee ^_^

Nah, it only works on Vikings from the frozen north land. Plus it can only reduce to guard status.
How about a sword to the chest? He'll be a beggar.

[King of Nowhere]

I'm curious about the fact that I keep seeing MitD's will save brought up because we've ("we" being SoD readers) seen it fail exactly once. We don't actually have evidence Xykon didn't just get lucky on that one, just like lizard-V did with the Suggestion spam against the young adult black dragon. MitD could have rolled a 1 the first time and even Xykon doesn't know how lucky he got there. It could even be that if that spell causes a second saving throw ever, X will be in for a nasty shock.

Actually, the reason I assume the mitd has a low will save is just his personality. he has a strong attitude at letting himself be pushed around, and that would come with weak willpower.
Of course, he could still have a majestic bonus to his save. We already saw that when he really cares, he can summon up some fierce willpower. So I wouldn't rule out the idea that SoD was just a bad dice roll. But all in all, the mitd really strikes me as the weak willed type.

And the point on him being unable to fly, and therefore reach xykon, stands. of course, we don't know all his skills. he teleported o-chul and V, he may as well be able to fly at will.

We don't really know how much powerful is exactly the mitd, so everything we can say on him vs X are wild guesses.

[Snails]

Of course, the real question is how on earth you would get Xykon into an AMF and keep him there. Good luck with that one.

If a 9this level Roy can succeed on the 2-3 grapple checks required to chuck Xykon through a Gate, even with a lot of plot & anger induced "luck", then it is as good as settled that a 14ish level Roy could accomplish something comparable.

It is possible for Xykon to possess spells that function in an AMF. It is also possible for, say, Roy to have feats to disrupt such spells. We are into the levels where the kid gloves come off, and it is not just Xykon who can have the fancy tricks.

Third of all, AMF is a possible tactical blind spot for Xykon. Xykon may say that all power is somewhat equal, but he seems to also believe that magical power is more equal than other kinds.

[Ksyr]

Roy. He has done it before.

[Alias]

You really think Xykon isn't prepared for an AMF? Really? Really?


In the D&D 3e game there isn't much to defend against antimagic except moving away from the source and hitting it with Mordenkainen's Disjunction (already seen in OOTS under the name 'Disjunction'). We know Xykon has the epic spell Superb Dispelling at his disposal so yeah, he can deal with it, but only if he can get out of the area of effect. If he's grappled like V found himself with Mamma Black Dragon, then match.

[Emulgator]

Well, going from weakest to strongest:

Everyone with some very very lucky dice throws. This is a DnD based comic after all.

Everyone catching him defenseless. Which would be hard, but could still happen. If he was out of spells, or coudn't cast them,then you just need to stay out of his range, or deal more damage than he is (and overcome his touch damage, AC, and whatnot.)

For prepared guys: Redcloak and Tarquin. given enough time, and circumstances that would weaken him. Like Smithing Evil paladins pointed at lich, some kind of Elite Array guards with a few levels helping them et cetera.
Otherwise they might lose, and we're talking about a more one sided winning.

For less preparation: Scribble. Soon nearly did it, Lirian wasn't bad either. Draketooth propably could get him, if he still exist that is.
Also MITD, if Xykon went with Meteor Swarms, instead of charms.

Linear Guild at full power with ZZ'dtri, Leeky, Tarquin and Malack. They would be much stronger than OOTS(I think), but I'm not sure if Leeky, Zz'dtri and Malack would have enough spellpower to bring Xykon down.

Black Dragon Momma, maybe.
Powered Darth V, without Redcloak helping Xykon and castle traps.
United Scribble, ven any three of them. Six would be overkill.
IFCC.
Dark One.
Snarl

[Kish]

In the D&D 3e game there isn't much to defend against antimagic except moving away from the source and hitting it with Mordenkainen's Disjunction (already seen in OOTS under the name 'Disjunction'). We know Xykon has the epic spell Superb Dispelling at his disposal so yeah, he can deal with it, but only if he can get out of the area of effect.

I'm pretty sure "Disjunction has to be cast outside the field" is a house-rule, or at best an interpretation. I could be wrong.
I'm very sure that all epic-level spells have a high chance of going right through an anti-magic field; Superb Dispelling is an epic-level spell.

[thereaper]

If you go by plot, no AMF will do in Xykon. It's too easy.

If you want to go by pure mechanics, Xykon can technically cast any spell he wants in an AMF; the results will simply be suppressed if they are inside the AMF. So he could very well use Disjunction on an AMF while inside it. It seems silly, but that's because most groups interpret AMFs as being a way for physicals to counter casters, when in fact they are intended to be a caster tactic against other casters.

[rbetieh]

Xykon has at least 10 levels on Redcloak. Redcloak could never straight-up take him in a caster vs. caster fight, not even if Jirix tanks the energy drains first.

...

Tarquin vs. Xykon would go just about as well as Roy vs. Xykon went.

I dont remember the rules, but doesnt Death Ward stop energy drains? Oh and now Redcloak has a ring for that too right?

I'm imagining the 'what if Tarquin was on the undead dragon instead of roy'...(1) Tarquin probably takes the deal Roy was offered barring that (2) When Xykon lists his 3 factors, Tarquin says "Factor 4: This scene is a Heros last stand, but I am not a Hero" make some sort of 'take that!' attack that doesnt kill but does hurt and ends up landing at negative HP instead of dead thanks to his ring of regenration....Slightly better outcome by not that much.


I suppose the question really ought to be, how much EQ does it take to make a mid-level adventurer on par with an Epic villain, especially considering that the villain gets WBL too....

[Chronos]

Trying to conclusively say that the Archfiends could beat him is difficult; since there isn't really any way of telling exactly how powerful they are. I've seen statlines for various versions of archfiends giving challenge ratings from 22 to 84, and it's possible, if unlikely, they are below even that and are just Pit Fiends/Balors/Ultraloths with delusions of grandeur.We know that the IFCC Fiends have access to the souls of multiple epic spellcasters (at least three and probably more, since those three were chosen to exactly compensate for V's weaknesses), and on their own power they were able to put an entire island under a Time Stop effect that lasted for several minutes (a far more powerful effect than a ninth-level spell). They're well above Xykon's power level, if they ever find themselves in a context where they can confront him directly.

[hoff]

Meteor Swarm and Energy Drain

Those are the spells Xykon uses the most. Take his own advice and get fire resistance and immunity to level draining, done. Roy and Durkon alone could take Xykon if they were prepared (and they are preparing).

I'm not sure on Epic rules, but I guess that a maximized energy drain he used before could pierce immunities. On the other hand he probably can't cast many of those per day (no more than 2 I would guess).

[Tergon]

I think in all this we're ignoring one crucial thing: the combat environment. Stick Xykon in an arena with his opponents, where he can get a clear shot at the start, and I think pretty much right away they're screwed, no? Picking where the fight takes place is going to be almost as important as how the fight takes place. None of the characters are going to attack Xykon on neutral ground, or where he has a home-field advantage, unless they have no choice.

I mean, we've seen the effects of things like falling undead-dragon-parts (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0441.html), hobgoblin-smashing rockfalls (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0190.html), and of course, Dorukan's Gate (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0114.html). Xykon may be cunning when he needs to be, but we've seen several times that he just doesn't think ahead enough to realise he might be walking into one hell of a trap. And there's got to be traps that can overcome his damage reduction, let alone modifiers based on environment that could be detrimental to a caster. Which, let's be honest, the various heroes and villains are more than capable of setting up with the massive resources and/or magic at their disposal.

Given the right setup, I'm even willing to believe that Roy's Sister could solo Xykon. If, and it's a big "if", she could make the fight take place on her terms.

[Spacewolf]

Someone could always just use the plan they had at Dorukans gate with roys sword if the teenage goblin hadnt warned him it might have worked. Both OOTS and the Linear guild have that ability at least as both have clerics. Although im not sure how Xykon has less HD than Durkon especially back then Malak might be a better bet as we dont know the full extent of his powers yet

[skaddix]

We know that the IFCC Fiends have access to the souls of multiple epic spellcasters (at least three and probably more, since those three were chosen to exactly compensate for V's weaknesses), and on their own power they were able to put an entire island under a Time Stop effect that lasted for several minutes (a far more powerful effect than a ninth-level spell). They're well above Xykon's power level, if they ever find themselves in a context where they can confront him directly.

Oh no doubt the Archfiends could crush him but they cannot operate on the mortal plane unless they are making deals so not a direct problem but yeah they do have access to some of the most powerful spellcasters to ever walk the mortal planes.

[Fitzclowningham]

Someone could always just use the plan they had at Dorukans gate with roys sword if the teenage goblin hadnt warned him it might have worked. Both OOTS and the Linear guild have that ability at least as both have clerics. Although im not sure how Xykon has less HD than Durkon especially back then Malak might be a better bet as we dont know the full extent of his powers yet

Most likely, Durkon was using Disrupting Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disruptingWeapon.htm), which only affects undead with HD equal to the caster level or lower, and only if the undead fails its Will save. At the time they made the plan, the OoTS probably had no idea what level Xykon was - with a lich's +4 level adjustment and resulting +2 CR, it would have been reasonable for them to assume Disrupting Weapon was worth a shot. Given what they know now, they won't even bother consider using it.

[Alias]

I'm pretty sure "Disjunction has to be cast outside the field" is a house-rule, or at best an interpretation. I could be wrong.




Antimagic Field
Abjuration
Level: Clr 8, Magic 6, Protection 6, Sor/Wiz 6
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 10 ft.
Area: 10-ft.-radius emanation, centered on you
Duration: 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: See text
An invisible barrier surrounds you and moves with you. The space within this barrier is impervious to most magical effects, including spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities. Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within its confines.

An antimagic field suppresses any spell or magical effect used within, brought into, or cast into the area, but does not dispel it. Time spent within an antimagic field counts against the suppressed spell’s duration.

Summoned creatures of any type and incorporeal undead wink out if they enter an antimagic field. They reappear in the same spot once the field goes away. Time spent winked out counts normally against the duration of the conjuration that is maintaining the creature. If you cast antimagic field in an area occupied by a summoned creature that has spell resistance, you must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against the creature’s spell resistance to make it wink out. (The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect, only its result.)

A normal creature can enter the area, as can normal missiles. Furthermore, while a magic sword does not function magically within the area, it is still a sword (and a masterwork sword at that). The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (unless they have been summoned, in which case they are treated like any other summoned creatures). Elementals, corporeal undead, and outsiders are likewise unaffected unless summoned. These creatures’ spell-like or supernatural abilities, however, may be temporarily nullified by the field. Dispel magic does not remove the field, though Mage's Disjunction might.

Two or more antimagic fields sharing any of the same space have no effect on each other. Certain spells, such as wall of force, prismatic sphere, and prismatic wall, remain unaffected by antimagic field (see the individual spell descriptions). Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.

Should a creature be larger than the area enclosed by the barrier, any part of it that lies outside the barrier is unaffected by the field.

Arcane Material Component
A pinch of powdered iron or iron filings.


Abjuration
Level: Magic 9, Sor/Wiz 9
Components: V
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Area: All magical effects and magic items within a 40-ft.-radius burst
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (object)
Spell Resistance: No
All magical effects and magic items within the radius of the spell, except for those that you carry or touch, are disjoined. That is, spells and spell-like effects are separated into their individual components (ending the effect as a dispel magic spell does), and each permanent magic item must make a successful Will save or be turned into a normal item. An item in a creature’s possession uses its own Will save bonus or its possessor’s Will save bonus, whichever is higher.

You also have a 1% chance per caster level of destroying an antimagic field. If the antimagic field survives the disjunction, no items within it are disjoined.

Even artifacts are subject to disjunction, though there is only a 1% chance per caster level of actually affecting such powerful items. Additionally, if an artifact is destroyed, you must make a DC 25 Will save or permanently lose all spellcasting abilities. (These abilities cannot be recovered by mortal magic, not even miracle or wish.)

Note: Destroying artifacts is a dangerous business, and it is 95% likely to attract the attention of some powerful being who has an interest in or connection with the device.


Upon re reading the two closely I suppose it can be cast within the area of effect.

[rbetieh]

Most likely, Durkon was using Disrupting Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disruptingWeapon.htm), which only affects undead with HD equal to the caster level or lower, and only if the undead fails its Will save. At the time they made the plan, the OoTS probably had no idea what level Xykon was - with a lich's +4 level adjustment and resulting +2 CR, it would have been reasonable for them to assume Disrupting Weapon was worth a shot. Given what they know now, they won't even bother consider using it.

I think the need to disrupt was superceded by the starmetal sword as well.

[dps]

I'm not sure exactly how much damage the MitD can dish out, but I wouldn't be surprised if he could one-shot Xykon with a physical attack if Xykon wasn't expecting an attack.

[Psyren]

Redcloak COULD take down Xykon if he really used the rules to his advantage. He can Gate in 34HD backup after all, and there's very little limit to what Miracle can actually do.

Neither will happen in the story of course, but in a game situation they would work.


In the D&D 3e game there isn't much to defend against antimagic except moving away from the source and hitting it with Mordenkainen's Disjunction (already seen in OOTS under the name 'Disjunction'). We know Xykon has the epic spell Superb Dispelling at his disposal so yeah, he can deal with it, but only if he can get out of the area of effect. If he's grappled like V found himself with Mamma Black Dragon, then match.

Epic magic can be cast from inside antimagic/dead magic if you succeed on your check.

Superb Dispelling is an odd duck. The pre-existing epic spell by RAW wouldn't be able to take down an AMF, but if you built the exact same spell yourself using the Dispel Seed then you could.


As for my own prediction, Xykon is walking around with the souls of two epic spellcasters that hate him to his core. I can't see that not biting him in the ass somehow.

That or MitD... whatever it is.

[Steward]

I would find it hard pressed to imagine a situation where a 3rd level wizard could beat an epic-level lich sorcerer. I agree with your original premise but that just doesn't sound possible to me.

I mean, what are Julia's best options right now. Scorching Ray? Glitterdust?

Meanwhile, Xykon is throwing around Superb Dispellings, Empowered Meteor Swarms, and Symbols of Insanity.

I agree that he's short-sighted and somewhat careless, but there is something to be said for brute strength. Unless "her terms" involve somehow getting Xykon to -9 hp and dying, I don't think Julia or anyone of 3rd level or less can solo Xykon. They just wouldn't have the resources that you described, that would be needed to whittle Xykon down to the point where he would be vulnerable to a non-epic opponent.

[Fish]

You'd first have to start with something that can destroy his phylactery, like a
big fat red dragoness.

[Once&FutureKing]

I would have thought any of the 3 soul splices could kill Xykon pretty handily.

V's master possibly could kill him, we don't know enough.

The Fiends are way beyond the level we've seen from Xykon. Forget the time stop over the Island, one of them shakes off a breath attack from frickin Tiamat!

The Black Dragon is almost a lock to win against Xykon.

Several order of the scribble members fighting together could beat him.

Dorukan fighting properly could beat him.

You get the feeling Tarquin could take him (prep or no), but we'll wait until we see more.

The guy isn't unkillable or anything.

[Tergon]

I agree that he's short-sighted and somewhat careless, but there is something to be said for brute strength. Unless "her terms" involve somehow getting Xykon to -9 hp and dying, I don't think Julia or anyone of 3rd level or less can solo Xykon. They just wouldn't have the resources that you described, that would be needed to whittle Xykon down to the point where he would be vulnerable to a non-epic opponent.

I meant it more as a figure of speech. I don't honestly believe that Julia would have much of a realistic chance, I was using her as an example of someone who very specifically doesn't have one. :P
My point was more along the lines of, "Xykon is by no means indestructible, it's just a matter of exploiting his weaknesses." Everyone is crunching numbers, comparing skills and spells, and whipping up hypotheticals about beings we know little about. I'm just suggesting that someone could lure him under a bridge, and drop it on him. I mean, it'd work!

[RMS Oceanic]

Roy. He has done it before.

Will he have access to Epic Level Abjuration Wards to deliver the killing blow again?

Right now I see Xykon going down in one of two ways:

1. A joint effort by the Order.
2. Some epic level or divine force stirred up when the ritual is attempted.

Ideally I'd prefer the first option, as it would show how effective the team effort has become since their first practice combat in Origin of PC's.

[zegram 33]

when did this ancient silver dragon battle happen, by the way?
also: Xykon is very powerful and seems to be more prepared and ready after the soons gate battle. However, i think leaving the goblin army behind might be a bad move since he tends to exhaust spells VERY quickly.
also, as said beforehand, carrying the souls he is might very well come back to haunt him (pun intended).
i may be wrong on this, but is there anything stopping miracle from reviving Dorukan and lirian from the gem to fightnhim as a team? considering that if they were likely both powerful enough to defeat Xykon alone if they were in the right frame of mind (especially Dorukan, I get the feeling if he hadnt warped out alone and unprepared for epic lich combat he could have handily taken out Xykon one-on-one)
This is especially since if a combat with xykon becomes necessary, then thor, the dark one, basically every god has a damn good reason to grant that miracle. Hell, with redcloaks recent comments, i wouldnt put it past him to ALREADY have swapped out the gem, and maybe even already broken it, meaning they could be revived by any cleric who might recently have gained true ressurection and be entering the dangerous stage of lich manipulation and looking for another arcane caster (bear in mind, dorukan is by all appearances a GENUINLEY good person like roy, and thus wouldnt have a problem with evening the balance of the world)
the last part is blatant and complete speculation, and frankly very unlikely, but i wouldnt be suprised if the scribble appeared again

[hamishspence]

Bonus strip- Paladin blues, immediately before Redcloak and company arrive at the library of Xykon's old lair.

This strip:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0195.html

takes place right after the battle.

[rbetieh]

Batman, who by virtue of this cameo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html) exists in ootsverse, can most certainly defeat Xykon, anyone that goes toe to toe with Darkseid will most likely beat Xykon.

[hamishspence]

He makes a cameo appearance in SoD as well.

[Math_Mage]

Still feel a lot of people are overestimating Tarquin. But then, it's hard to tell when we've seen so little of him. I just don't think anyone's going to axe Xykon to death.


Batman, who by virtue of this cameo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html) exists in ootsverse, can most certainly defeat Xykon, anyone that goes toe to toe with Darkseid will most likely beat Xykon.

(Speaking of that cameo, I never did get the joke about "Sit.")

[rbetieh]

(Speaking of that cameo, I never did get the joke about "Sit.")

Hmm maybe on account of druid wildshape he is more mastiff than man now?

[Morthis]

In the D&D 3e game there isn't much to defend against antimagic except moving away from the source and hitting it with Mordenkainen's Disjunction (already seen in OOTS under the name 'Disjunction'). We know Xykon has the epic spell Superb Dispelling at his disposal so yeah, he can deal with it, but only if he can get out of the area of effect. If he's grappled like V found himself with Mamma Black Dragon, then match.

Since superb dispelling is epic, it is not automatically suppressed by AMS. He could cast it inside AMS and dispel AMS (along with all other buffs like death ward) quite easily. AMS has to make a DC check to see if it suppresses epic magic, which is 20 + D20 vs a DC of 11 + Xykon's level. With Xykon likely level being at least mid-late 20's, the chance of AMS actually stopping it is very small.

[Psyren]

(Speaking of that cameo, I never did get the joke about "Sit.")

Durkon is treating the druid like a wild animal that he has just (forcefully) tamed.

[Once&FutureKing]

Since superb dispelling is epic, it is not automatically suppressed by AMS. He could cast it inside AMS and dispel AMS (along with all other buffs like death ward) quite easily. AMS has to make a DC check to see if it suppresses epic magic, which is 20 + D20 vs a DC of 11 + Xykon's level. With Xykon likely level being at least mid-late 20's, the chance of AMS actually stopping it is very small.

Superb Dispelling (might) be able to work in an AMF, but Superb Dispelling quite explicitly does not dispel an AMF (as someone here pointed out). That makes it rather useless in this case. Also AMF could be cast many times per day by some of these antagonists, while Xykon has thus far shown himself able to cast an Epic spell once per day, so even if it could dispel the AMF, it would not matter, since it could be cast again.

[Durmegil Guldur]

Maybe if we can find Roy a source of gamma rays......

[LudiDrizzt]

People seriously overestimate the Black Dragon.

[Yaminsoul]

-As I mentioned in the other thread I started and as Psyren stated, RC is probably the most likely one we have seen in comic. He can cast 9th level spells, knows Xykon's weaknesses and combat patterns, and could summon massive help. Plus, now he has the phylactery...again, but Xykon presumable wont know he has it...

- MITD, if he is the epic level monster people have speculated about, COULD likely beat Xykon, but whether he has the inclination is another mater.

-Girard, who is also presumable epic level, could but the rest of his party has not fared so well...at least in single combat....

-Oots...Err not by traditional D and D logic, which states that an Epic level caster with various immunities is not going to lose to a bunch of presumably 14-15 level adventures. I know some dice rolling is involved, and Xykon can be arrogant and dumb in combat, but...really not. Even working together, prepared, with a good battle plan, ect....without 9th level spells can't see it working, not a against something immune to critical hits and death spells. Note Xykon's speech (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0442.html) which is pretty much straight up tell Roy this...and this is when most though he "just" has 9th level spells and was around 19-20th level.

Of course, its a comic loosely based on D and D rules, so anything is possible :)

[Once&FutureKing]

People seriously overestimate the Black Dragon.

How so? Based on what we know so far Xykon couldn't really do anything to her.

[LudiDrizzt]

How so? Based on what we know so far Xykon couldn't really do anything to her.

Are you serious?

Darth V beat her. And for some reason you think Xykon cannot?

It's not like she's not an ancient black dragon, she's an adult with a few levels in Sorcerer.

[Once&FutureKing]

Are you serious?

Darth V beat her. And for some reason you think Xykon cannot?

It's not like she's not an ancient black dragon, she's an adult with a few levels in Sorcerer.

Well, she's described as "Ancient", so I don't see why we wouldn't assume she is. She had abilities actually beyond what an ancient black dragon should have.

But I don't think that's super relevant. Just like whether Darth V beat her is relevant. Roy beat Xykon in the comic. Does it follow Roy could beat the Ancient Black Dragon? No. Darth V had abilities Xykon is not hinted to have, let alone shown. Based on what we've seen, Xykon can't really do anything to her, while she could easily crush him.

[Tanuki Tales]

People seriously overestimate the Black Dragon.

Yeah. This.

Xykon is, bare minimum, level 21 and there is a good argument for him being closer to the back end of the 20s.

He's also a caster.

By lieu of plot, Mama Dragon wouldn't win.

By lieu of mechanics.... He's an epic level caster who also has a pretty nice template that wouldn't be too negatively affecting his overall power ratio by that point in time. The idea of Mama Dragon even standing a chance when an Ancient Silver Dragon is higher CRed and arguably a tad more powerful than a Great Wyrm Black Dragon?

Edit:

Also, I think people are tending to forget that Mama Dragon stomped V because of extenuating circumstances.

Edit Edit:

Concerning an AMF and Superb Dispelling; couldn't Xykon use Superb Dispelling as a counterspell against the AMF?

[Once&FutureKing]

The Ancient Silver Dragon is even smaller than the Black one (when it should be drawn larger to fit the D&D scale), so why are we assuming the Silver Dragon is Ancient, and the Black one isn't? The Black one at least has showings and abilities more consistent with being an Ancient Black Dragon.

EDIT: And no, Superb Dispelling explicitly doesn't negate an AMF, as someone else already pointed out. Not to mention, an AMF can be cast many times per day by the dragon, while Xykon hasn't shown he can cast an Epic spell more than once per day, so even if the spell worked through the AMF (not certain), and even if it somehow could do what it's description makes clear it cannot (it can't), then the Dragon just re-casts it. Even worse for Xykon though, every single time he casts Superb Dispelling, he takes substantial backlash damage, so even if he could cast it 6-8 times say, he would just kill himself faster.

[Tanuki Tales]

The Ancient Silver Dragon is even smaller than the Black one (when it should be drawn larger to fit the D&D scale), so why are we assuming the Silver Dragon is Ancient, and the Black one isn't? The Black one at least has showings and abilities more consistent with being an Ancient Black Dragon.

Because that's trying to use Artistic License to prove your point?

I never said Mama wasn't Ancient but an Ancient Black Dragon < Ancient Silver Dragon.

[Once&FutureKing]

Because that's trying to use Artistic License to prove your point?

I never said Mama wasn't Ancient but an Ancient Black Dragon < Ancient Silver Dragon.

And the Silver Dragon also beat him. How does this help your point?

[Jayabalard]

Upon re reading the two closely I suppose it can be cast within the area of effect.I'd say that since "it prevents the functioning of any magic items or spells within its confines" the amf prevents the disjunction spell from function if you are within it's confines. There's nothing specific in disjunction that would override that.

[Tanuki Tales]

EDIT: And no, Superb Dispelling explicitly doesn't negate an AMF, as someone else already pointed out. Not to mention, an AMF can be cast many times per day by the dragon, while Xykon hasn't shown he can cast an Epic spell more than once per day, so even if the spell worked through the AMF (not certain), and even if it somehow could do what it's description makes clear it cannot (it can't), then the Dragon just re-casts it. Even worse for Xykon though, every single time he casts Superb Dispelling, he takes substantial backlash damage, so even if he could cast it 6-8 times say, he would just kill himself faster.

Please re-read what I said.

Superb Dispelling can be used as a Counterspell to Anti-magic Field as it's being cast.

Edit:

And it proves my point because an Ancient Black Dragon =/= an Ancient Silver Dragon. The CR discrepency is 4.

Edit Edit:

There's also a good chance Xykon has leveled since fighting that Ancient Silver Dragon and he has spent a good amount of time crafting custom made magic items (even if he only made a handful of them). He's not the same Lich now that he was when he first was defeated by the Order of the Stick.


Edit Edit Edit:

And again, there were extenuating circumstances where Mama Black Dragon beat V. Just because she did so well doesn't mean it'd be anywhere near the same ball game with Xykon.

[Kaveman26]

When did Xykon fight a silver dragon? I don't recall this.

[Obnoxious Hydra]

When did Xykon fight a silver dragon? I don't recall this.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0195.html

While the dead Silver Dragon in the background was originally just a little extra feature, in one of the printed books there was a bonus strip(s) which showed the actual fight Xykon and Redcloak had with the Silver Dragon.

I don't have the book, but from what I can gather, the MITD had to get involved otherwise both of them would have died.

[Tanuki Tales]

I don't have the book, but from what I can gather, the MITD had to get involved otherwise both of them would have died.

Which makes sense at the time.

Redcloak was a mid-level cleric at the time and I can't think of anything that would have made Xykon definitely higher than 21 when he retook his tower. Add in the fact they had to plow through basically every good creature in the Monster Manual before getting to that dragon and the fact it was a creature meant to challenge a group of four level 20 or higher PCs at it's CR of 23?

[Psyren]

I don't have the book, but from what I can gather, the MITD had to get involved otherwise both of them would have died.

No Cure for the la-di-da spoiler:

Xykon and Redcloak weakened the dragon, but it got the upper hand and was about to take them out - until a random goblin mook landed the finishing sneak attack. He was then promptly... terminated... as he had earned too much XP from that encounter to still be a mook. (I kid you not.)

The MitD did not take part in the battle.

[Gift Jeraff]

Actually, it wasn't the MitD.It was Shelby (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0824.html).Though Redcloak says he could have helped them.
Redcloak was a mid-level cleric at the time and I can't think of anything that would have made Xykon definitely higher than 21 when he retook his tower. Add in the fact they had to plow through basically every good creature in the Monster Manual before getting to that dragon and the fact it was a creature meant to challenge a group of four level 20 or higher PCs at it's CR of 23?Xykon had to be epic level to cast Cloister. Redcloak couldn't have been much weaker--he reaches 13th level 1~2 years before the strip starts, and is either 15th or 16th level during the war. EDIT: Just realized you said higher than 21. Nevermind. But I doubt he was much lower level than he is currently. It was only about a year ago in-comic.

[Tanuki Tales]

Actually, it wasn't the MitD.It was Shelby (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0824.html).Though Redcloak says he could have helped them.Xykon had to be epic level to cast Cloister. Redcloak couldn't have been much weaker--he reaches 13th level 1~2 years before the strip starts, and is either 15th or 16th level during the war.

That...really doesn't disprove what I had said.

And I realize that maybe "mid-level" was the wrong term to use since I personally consider 10-15 "mid-level" and I know not everyone else does.

Edit:

Like I said, some people argue he's 21-24. Some people can argue he's 25-29.

Edit Edit:

And my point still stands that Xykon is more powerful now than then and that an Ancient Silver Dragon is definitively stronger than an Ancient Black Dragon.

[Joerg]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0195.html
I don't have the book, but from what I can gather, the MITD had to get involved otherwise both of them would have died.

No, it was just luck. A random hobgoblin mook killed the dragon with a critical hit. MitD wasn't involved.

Edit: Ninjas everywhere :smallwink:

[JSSheridan]

Batman, who by virtue of this cameo (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0359.html) exists in ootsverse, can most certainly defeat Xykon, anyone that goes toe to toe with Darkseid will most likely beat Xykon.

That depends if he's the Adam West Batman or Frank Miller's Batman.

[Once&FutureKing]

XP is gained more and more slowly as you are on higher levels, so the idea Xykon is now "far more powerful" is just unsubstantiated (and unlikely).

How does Xykon losing to a Silver Dragon make it more or less likely he would (also) lose to a Black Dragon? I just don't understand how this helps your argument.

I don't think Superb Dispelling is a counter spell, but let's assume it is. It inflicts 10d6 of backlash damage on Xykon each use. That's an awful strategy, since the Black Dragon can cast AMF a minimum of 8 times (possible more), and in 6-8 uses Xykon will be dead many times over (estimates for his hit points would be, what, 180?). Ignoring the fact we have no evidence Xykon CAN cast it this many times (which is hugely unlikely, and would involve him being a higher level than the current huge level he's projected at).

[Fish]

Could Redcloak defeat Xykon if he
turned himself into a lich? Presumably he knows how.

[Tanuki Tales]

XP is gained more and more slowly as you are on higher levels, so the idea Xykon is now "far more powerful" is just unsubstantiated (and unlikely).

Be that as it may, there is a definitive difference in the level of power that Xykon show cases in the beginning of the story compared to the level he currently shows. whether or not this is because Xykon had been holding back or just not using his full might or if he did become stronger over the course of the narrative is a realistic argument to have.

But since he first fought that Ancient Silver Dragon he has:

Took part in the clearing of an entire tower of good monsters.
Took part in the defeat of an Ancient Silver Dragon
Took part in the war on Azure City
Slaughtered the Sapphire Guard
Took part in the defeating of the Ghost Martyrs of the Sapphire Guard
Took part in the defeat of Soon
Took part in defeating Darth V

All but the war would have garnered him at least some XP and some of those approach level appropriate encounters for Xykon that he handled with at most the aid of Redcloak, netting him more XP than would be normal.

This alone, with Rich's lack of marriage to the rules, could result in Xykon increasing in level at some point.

And even ignoring this, he has been crafting items the whole time he was in Azure City, items he didn't have prior to the invasion. So that defines him as being more powerful than before.


How does Xykon losing to a Silver Dragon make it more or less likely he would (also) lose to a Black Dragon? I just don't understand how this helps your argument.

You're the one making this argument here, not me. :smallconfused:


I don't think Superb Dispelling is a counter spell, but let's assume it is. It inflicts 10d6 of backlash damage on Xykon each use. That's an awful strategy, since the Black Dragon can cast AMF a minimum of 8 times (possible more), and in 6-8 uses Xykon will be dead many times over (estimates for his hit points would be, what, 180?). Ignoring the fact we have no evidence Xykon CAN cast it this many times (which is hugely unlikely, and would involve him being a higher level than the current huge level he's projected at).


Counterspell
When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell. Unlike a true counterspell, however, dispel magic may not work; you must make a dispel check to counter the other spellcaster’s spell.

Boom. Relevant quote is relevant. Superb Dispelling can be used as a counterspell; no ifs, ands or buts.

And you assume Mama Black Dragon is going to have the luxury of using this strategy or that she would waste her 6th spell slots exclusively on Anti-magic field because?

She went this route with V to humilate hir after she'd seen to that V was running out of spells or had already blown most of the good ones in hir repetoire. Because V is about as fragile as a commoner without hir spells, especially since V doesn't generally use buffs.

Xykon on the other hand is a Lich. A Lich with a bare minimum defense of Damage Reduction 15. Mama Black Dragon, on average, would be doing neglible damage to Xykon if she went that route. So she turns off the magic and basically turns this into a battle of attrition.

Against an epic level sorcerer.

Is she really going to go this route where things could suddenly change and leave her face first with a caster with offensive magic that dwarfs her own?

Edit Edit:

By the by:

By the time he fights Darth V, Xykon is bare minimum level 23 because he would need the Epic Spellcasting feat in order to cast Superb Dispelling.

The arguements where he may be higher come from either assuming he has metamagic rods on his person or if he took the Improved Spellcasting feat, which would require him to be at least 26th level.

[Once&FutureKing]

This alone, with Rich's lack of marriage to the rules, could result in Xykon increasing in level at some point.


Here's an idea; let's give Xykon the powers and abilities he is actually shown to have, and not baselessly speculate how strong he was. I could equally speculate the Black Dragon can summon Tiamat to crush Xykon (or has an enchanted sword that can one shot Xykon). Where does such speculation get us? Let's go off what they've actually shown.

And you can't gain more than one level at a time, even if you gain a billion XP from one encounter.


You're the one making this argument here, not me
I think you're confused.

Once the AMF is activated, Xykon can't win. Not to mention, an AMF makes all other spells moot in a fight, so of course the Black Dragon will be casting it, therei s literally no better purpose than to start the fight off that way. And Lich's don't get damage reduction in an AMF, he's a fragile skeleton waiting to be crushed to powder. Repeating "Epic" over and over doesn't change the fact that Xykon has shown no abilities thus far which would lead us to believe he can win.

And remember, I'm talking about actual abilities he has shown, not made up stuff like "he could have a ring of epicness".

I don't mean to be rude about this next part, but I really think you should read up on Dragons. I mean, "negligible damage"? Do you know how much damage and how many attacks per round (it's 6 btw) an ABD can dish out? Once the Dragon grabs Xykon, he's done for. The Dragon is also much faster than Xykon.

[Psyren]

Once the AMF is activated, Xykon can't win.

Just to note: AMFs do not automatically suppress epic spells. And Xykon, having Still Spell and high enough slots to still a 9th, can effectively cast his entire repertoire while being grappled; even if the ABD catches him in the field, that is no guarantee of victory.

[dps]

Be that as it may, there is a definitive difference in the level of power that Xykon show cases in the beginning of the story compared to the level he currently shows. whether or not this is because Xykon had been holding back or just not using his full might or if he did become stronger over the course of the narrative is a realistic argument to have.

But since he first fought that Ancient Silver Dragon he has:

Took part in the clearing of an entire tower of good monsters.
Took part in the defeat of an Ancient Silver Dragon
Took part in the war on Azure City
Slaughtered the Sapphire Guard
Took part in the defeating of the Ghost Martyrs of the Sapphire Guard
Took part in the defeat of Soon
Took part in defeating Darth V



What defeat of Soon?

[SaintRidley]

What defeat of Soon?

It's not really a defeat of Soon, but in D&D you gain xp for overcoming challenges. Xykon and Redcloak do, in a roundabout way, get xp for overcoming the challenge of not getting killed by Soon, even if it was by sheer luck and running away and Soon having to disappear.

[Kish]

No, Miko gets all the experience from the defeat of Soon.

Redcloak and Xykon don't get XP for running away from an enemy who happened to be defeated before they went back.

[Tanuki Tales]

Here's an idea; let's give Xykon the powers and abilities he is actually shown to have, and not baselessly speculate how strong he was. I could equally speculate the Black Dragon can summon Tiamat to crush Xykon (or has an enchanted sword that can one shot Xykon). Where does such speculation get us? Let's go off what they've actually shown.

See, this amuses me. You completely ignore everything else that was before what you chose to quote. And then you run hogwild into exaggeration-ville with what you did quote.

Instead of, you know, taking the reasonable meaning of Rich being able to choose the XP caps for his characters. Xykon took on reasonable encounters that would have garnered him XP (in some cases large chunks of XP) so it leads to reason that he may just, surprise, increase in level.

And here's another novel idea; how about we don't lowball the main antagonist just to elevate a one off mini-boss because she's a dragon and dragons are just plain awesome compared to feeble casters!


And you can't gain more than one level at a time, even if you gain a billion XP from one encounter.

Thank you for stating the obvious? :smallconfused:



I think you're confused.

No, I think that's you. Since you can't seem to get that just because two dragons of different breeds are the same age category that doesn't mean they are remotely the same in power.


Once the AMF is activated, Xykon can't win.

Really arguable. AMF isn't an instant win button. Let alone against a higher level caster.


Not to mention, an AMF makes all other spells moot in a fight,

Not really. There are threads and threads about what shenanigans can be used concerning AMFs. Conjuration spells with Instant durations, for example, aren't affected by AMFs.


so of course the Black Dragon will be casting it, therei s literally no better purpose than to start the fight off that way.

Funny.

Why was she cautious concerning attacking V when shi was with Durkon and Hinjo and the rest of the Azure City refugees?

And why did she wait for V to waste most hir higher level spells against Qarr? And why did she wait till V was basically at hir wits end from mental fatigue?

If she really was this bastion of badass with an unstoppable win button, then she would have no reason not to just put it up and go in guns blazing.


And Lich's don't get damage reduction in an AMF, he's a fragile skeleton waiting to be crushed to powder.

And you're right here. I forgot that the Lich's Damage Reduction was Supernatural in 3.5.


Repeating "Epic" over and over doesn't change the fact that Xykon has shown no abilities thus far which would lead us to believe he can win.

And repeating, "She's a Dragon" and "AMF" over and over again doesn't make the Mama Black Dragon any more out of her depth here than she is.


And remember, I'm talking about actual abilities he has shown, not made up stuff like "he could have a ring of epicness".

Yeah, so am I. I'm sure someone else would be kind enough to post the appropriate strips where Xykon mentions how he spends every day working on Magic items. But I'll go search for it to, just to be sure.

Hey, look, I'm in fact, not making it up either! What a treat! :smallbiggrin:


I don't mean to be rude about this next part, but I really think you should read up on Dragons. I mean, "negligible damage"? Do you know how much damage and how many attacks per round (it's 6 btw) an ABD can dish out? Once the Dragon grabs Xykon, he's done for. The Dragon is also much faster than Xykon.

And I think you need to stop exalting them.

I forgot about one rule change from 3.5 to Pathfinder, so sue me.

With his DR, the Mama Dragon would be doing negligible damage. And that's being generous by not making any of her natural attacks secondary and assuming she's Ancient and thus has a strength score of 35.

And the Dragon is faster but also has poorer maneuverability compared to Xykon.

And Xykon's epic spells can knock through the field potentially and we don't know all of Xykon's spell list as of yet. That's kind of an asspull, yes, but there are some simple level 1 spells that render an AMF a wee pointless.


What defeat of Soon?

It's been a little while since I read that strip, but wasn't Xykon still present when Miko destroyed the gate and cut off Soon's anchor to the material realm? An encounter doesn't always end with the death of the "monster" and not every victory has to be said death. Defeating a foe in the confines of the encounter or having them flee or what have you still counts as the encounter being completed.

[KoboldRevenge]

Tarquin vs. Xykon would go just about as well as Roy vs. Xykon went.

The first time? Because that went pretty well.:smalltongue:

But probably Xykon has gotten some sort of protection from the head punching attack.

[Kish]

It's been a little while since I read that strip, but wasn't Xykon still present when Miko destroyed the gate and cut off Soon's anchor to the material realm? An encounter doesn't always end with the death of the "monster" and not every victory has to be said death. Defeating a foe in the confines of the encounter or having them flee or what have you still counts as the encounter being completed.
You do not "defeat" someone by getting the stuffing beaten out of you and cowering on the floor while someone else comes in and distracts them, then running as fast as you can while the distraction turns out to kill them.

If the DMs you play with give overcame-the-challenge (not story) experience for an encounter that ends that way, well...you know very generous DMs.

[Tanuki Tales]

You do not "defeat" someone by getting the stuffing beaten out of you and cowering on the floor while someone else comes in and distracts them, then running as fast as you can while the distraction turns out to kill them.

If the DMs you play with give overcame-the-challenge (not story) experience for an encounter that ends that way, well...you know very generous DMs.

That's your opinion and not mine and not necessarily Rich's.

There are several ways to skin the encounter cat and not all of them are the same merit.

Regardless, I'd just like to say that I'm done at this point.

I've said my piece concerning the idea of a CR 19 Dragon, who was a one-off mini-boss, beating the (bare minimum and assuming my calculation for associated levels is right) CR 25 Main Antagonist, Full Caster Lich.

My opponent will no more likely change his mind than I will mine and trying to make him is just beating a dead horse.

A good day to you all.

[Chronos]

Really arguable. AMF isn't an instant win button. Let alone against a higher level caster.Ordinarily, you're right. Because ordinarily, the caster of an antimagic field is a squishy humanoid who draws most of their power from magic. A dragon, any dragon, doesn't have that limitation.

Really, what could Xykon do against a dragon in an AMF? Just saying "He's epic" doesn't cut it-- Be specific. The only trick he has that we've ever seen that would even arguably work is Superb Dispelling. And if he uses that, the dragon just re-casts it. In order to be able to cast Anti-Magic Field at all, the dragon must be able to cast it at least three times a day. Assuming that Xykon is less than 37th level, he has at most three epic spells a day (and maybe only two, if he's less than 27, or hasn't been maxing out Knowledge: Arcana). Best case scenario for Xykon, he trades actions with the dragon to cast Superb Dispelling three times, and uses up all of her 6th-level spell slots... And meanwhile, he's used up all of his epic slots, and has taken about half his HP total in backlash damage.

Yes, Darth V was able to defeat Mamma Dragon. E also had a lot of advantages that Xykon doesn't: Disjunction (the ninth-level one without backlash damage, not the epic one) Quickened spells, Time Stop, Energy Immunity, Mind Blank, Protection from Spells, Fire Shield, and Shapechange.

[Psyren]

For what it's worth, I wouldn't give X and RC any xp for Soon either. His job was to protect the gate from them, and he succeeded; had he not been there, the ritual would have already been underway if not complete. The only challenge they overcame was not having their (un)life force rearranged by a vengeful epic Deathless.



EDIT: And no, Superb Dispelling explicitly doesn't negate an AMF, as someone else already pointed out.

This is highly debatable. Yes, the sample Superb Dispelling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/superbDispelling.htm) "functions as dispel magic" and arguably would be subject to the same limitations. But this is yet another example of WotC not knowing their own rules. If I used the Dispel Seed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/dispel.htm) to develop the exact same spell (as Xykon would have had to do), and even call it Superb Dispelling, it would work against AMF just fine.

RAW is plain as day:


The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic.

[SaintRidley]

Antimagic field does not automatically suppress epic spells as it does standard spells. Instead, each time an epic spell is subject to an antimagic field, make a dispel check as a 20th-level caster (1d20 + 20). The epic spell has a DC of 11 + the epic spell’s spellcaster level. If the suppression check is successful, the epic spell is suppressed like any other spell. If the dispel check is unsuccessful, the epic spell functions normally.

Let's assume Xykon is 23rd level and has no boosts to caster level, for simplicity's sake. Any epic spell Xykon casts while in an antimagic field has a 30% chance of being nullified and a 70% chance of just laughing at the pathetic lesser magic and working.

We know he's developed three epic spells - Cloister, Epic Mage Armor, Superb Dispelling. We do not know if that is all of them, though.

Just thought I'd put that there for everyone.


And Kish, I would think even in text it was obvious I was using a sarcastic tone about how Xykon and Redcloak "overcame the challenge" of not getting destroyed.

[Once&FutureKing]

Just to note: AMFs do not automatically suppress epic spells. And Xykon, having Still Spell and high enough slots to still a 9th, can effectively cast his entire repertoire while being grappled; even if the ABD catches him in the field, that is no guarantee of victory.

No, they don't automatically, but it's not 100% Xykon's spell will work (a spell he can cast once per day as far as we know, and which inflicts considerable backlash damage to him). Xykon can cast nothing while grappled, because his "entire repertoire" isn't Epic, only his actual epic spells are epic, and those spells are not going to be helpful in hurting the Black Dragon in any event.

This means if the Black Dragon grabs Xykon he's got no way to escape. Which means he is dead.


No, I think that's you. Since you can't seem to get that just because two dragons of different breeds are the same age category that doesn't mean they are remotely the same in power.


You're just talking about irrelevant stuff. Yes, the Silver Dragon could have been stronger than the Black Dragon (if it was Ancient it certainly would be), but what of it? The Silver Dragon beat Xykon too. It's like me saying "The Hulk can't kick down a House, because Galactus can kick down a house", when in reality they can both kick down a house. The fact that Galactus/SilverDragon can do it doesn't negate the fact Hulk/BlackDragon can do it too.


Really arguable. AMF isn't an instant win button. Let alone against a higher level caster
The AMF is an instant win button if Xykon can't cancel it, and we have no evidence he can.

You also don't want to be going down the path of "if the Dragon acts in character, she won't put the field up right away", because Xykon acting "in character" is a moron who never fights all out right away. The Dragon put the field up as soon as she thought she needed it, both times proving to be stunningly accurate. The dragon didn't use it before because she has cunningly waited until V was out of spells that could hurt her, and she was right.

[Once&FutureKing]

Your post is a separate query to the "Xykon can't lose, he's EPIC!!!!" band, so I will answer it here separately.


This is highly debatable. Yes, the sample Superb Dispelling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/superbDispelling.htm) "functions as dispel magic" and arguably would be subject to the same limitations. But this is yet another example of WotC not knowing their own rules. If I used the Dispel Seed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/dispel.htm) to develop the exact same spell (as Xykon would have had to do), and even call it Superb Dispelling, it would work against AMF just fine.

RAW is plain as day:

The actual spell though is very clear, and that should trump a hypothetical spell that could have been invented using the same rules, even if it is bad writing on the authors part.

Let's also note that although the Epic Dispel seed does say it can overcome it, it is quite vague:

The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic.
So it CAN overcome them, but it doesn't mean it ALWAYS will overcome them, or that overcoming them won't have a cost or something. There's alot of spells which I think everyone agrees couldn't be superb dispelled away, even with such a hypothetical spell, so it's just bad writing. However that bad writing tells us it won't work (and even if it did, would be nearly useless).

[Once&FutureKing]

Ordinarily, you're right. Because ordinarily, the caster of an antimagic field is a squishy humanoid who draws most of their power from magic. A dragon, any dragon, doesn't have that limitation.

Really, what could Xykon do against a dragon in an AMF? Just saying "He's epic" doesn't cut it-- Be specific. The only trick he has that we've ever seen that would even arguably work is Superb Dispelling. And if he uses that, the dragon just re-casts it. In order to be able to cast Anti-Magic Field at all, the dragon must be able to cast it at least three times a day. Assuming that Xykon is less than 37th level, he has at most three epic spells a day (and maybe only two, if he's less than 27, or hasn't been maxing out Knowledge: Arcana). Best case scenario for Xykon, he trades actions with the dragon to cast Superb Dispelling three times, and uses up all of her 6th-level spell slots... And meanwhile, he's used up all of his epic slots, and has taken about half his HP total in backlash damage.

Yes, Darth V was able to defeat Mamma Dragon. E also had a lot of advantages that Xykon doesn't: Disjunction (the ninth-level one without backlash damage, not the epic one) Quickened spells, Time Stop, Energy Immunity, Mind Blank, Protection from Spells, Fire Shield, and Shapechange.

It's even worse for Xykon. The Dragon is at least 15th level as a caster (maybe 17 or higher, but definitely 15), which means at least 8 uses of AMF. Even if Xykon could cast Superb Dispelling 8 times, and get lucky every time (meaning it works), and Superb Dispelling could do something it can't, he would be dead from backlash damage.

[Kish]

And Kish, I would think even in text it was obvious I was using a sarcastic tone about how Xykon and Redcloak "overcame the challenge" of not getting destroyed.
And I wasn't serious about Miko getting XP for "overcoming" Soon, either.

But, it appears from Troll Brau's post, it is possible to seriously believe that Xykon and Redcloak somehow overcame Soon.

[Psyren]

The actual spell though is very clear

Which as I said is irrelevant. Xykon has to develop his own epic spells, no matter which ones are or are not present in the ELH. That development will incorporate the Seed rules by necessity.


So it CAN overcome them, but it doesn't mean it ALWAYS will overcome them

Right, that's what the caster level check is for.


It's even worse for Xykon. The Dragon is at least 15th level as a caster (maybe 17 or higher, but definitely 15), which means at least 8 uses of AMF. Even if Xykon could cast Superb Dispelling 8 times, and get lucky every time (meaning it works), and Superb Dispelling could do something it can't, he would be dead from backlash damage.

Unlike V, Xykon knows escape tools like Teleport and Ghostform; he has no reason to loiter around in melee with a dragon.

[Dark Elf Bard]

Mitd!!!!!!!!

[rbetieh]

And I wasn't serious about Miko getting XP for "overcoming" Soon, either.

But, it appears from Troll Brau's post, it is possible to seriously believe that Xykon and Redcloak somehow overcame Soon.

In the Oracles twisted-logic sense, it could be true. Soon was forced to finish the two himself because they wiped out all the rest of the paladins. That put Soon close to them and far away from the Gate. This decreased Soons ability to stop Miko, which lead to the destruction of the Gate and the destruction of Soon. So if it hadn't have been for Xykon and Redcloaks (and Jirixs) effort, the threat of Ghost Soon would not have been overcome :smallbiggrin:

(looks around nervously for irate Halflings.....:smalleek:)

[Once&FutureKing]

Which as I said is irrelevant. Xykon has to develop his own epic spells, no matter which ones are or are not present in the ELH. That development will incorporate the Seed rules by necessity.



Right, that's what the caster level check is for.



Unlike V, Xykon knows escape tools like Teleport and Ghostform; he has no reason to loiter around in melee with a dragon.

1) It's called "Superb dispelling", so I'm going to assume it's the same one created by the company in question, and not Xykon's own version.
2) So Xykon can run away? I agree, he could teleport away if he can do so before the (much faster) Dragon gets within AMF distance (though Ghostform will be negated by the AMF). You know who else could do that? The random teleporter who worked for Shojo. There's nothing Epic about his ability to run away. I'm asking how he can WIN the fight, since people keep saying he obviously will. Certainly if Xykon fights in character he won't be smart enough to teleport away until it's too late, but even with the utmost caution running away seems to be all he can do here.

[Psyren]

1) It's called "Superb dispelling", so I'm going to assume it's the same one created by the company in question, and not Xykon's own version.

The company in question created the Dispel Seed also.

And the ELH has this to say (page 88):


All the epic spells described earlier in this chapter can be developed independently by a character who spends the necessary time, money, and experience points. Alternatively, you can use those spells as a starting point when you create customized versions of the spells. For example, if you want a version of vengeful gaze of god that deals less backlash damage, you are free to develop it.

Note that the custom version would still be called "Vengeful Gaze of God." The names are irrelevant.


2) So Xykon can run away? I agree, he could teleport away if he can do so before the (much faster) Dragon gets within AMF distance (though Ghostform will be negated by the AMF).

Not if he ghosts into the ground, which would block the emanation's line of effect.


Certainly if Xykon fights in character he won't be smart enough to teleport away until it's too late, but even with the utmost caution running away seems to be all he can do here.

Having epic ranks in Spellcraft and Know (arcana), it's a safe bet he knows what an AMF is and that he should avoid it. And yes, he CAN do something - i.e. ready an action to blast the dragon's face/wings off, since she's too big to fit in her own field by RAW. And that's assuming he doesn't know any instantaneous conjurations.

[Once&FutureKing]

But we have no indication this is a variant. And the Epic Dispel Seed CAN overcome other spells it normally wouldn't, it doesn't say it ALWAYS necessarily will. For whatever reason, Superb Dispelling doesn't.

Dragons can dig (fast).

By RAW [such and such that happened in the comic lots of times] shouldn't have happened. But it did. So who cares about RAW in those cases, when it's clearly being ignored? Here, the AMF fits around the Dragon for whatever reason. There's no merit is discussing how it might not fit in another universe, because it does fit, we can see it does.

[Anarion]

Another thought regarding the AMF issue. What would the timing be for falling rules? Assume that Xykon is high enough that in a round of falling he would move out of the AMF. Would he fall immediately when the dragon with an AMF flies up to him, thus falling out of the range of the field before the dragon can attack him? Or would he somehow hover in place without any means of doing so until it got around to his turn? The comic with V (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html) seems to imply that he would be able to be attacked by the dragon somehow.

Even if Xykon did sit in place to get attacked, he would fall out of the AMF on his own turn at the latest, which would give him a chance to use any spells, magic items, etc. that he might have on him. At the very least, he could escape and come back with specially prepared resources.

[Da'Shain]

But we have no indication this is a variant. And the Epic Dispel Seed CAN overcome other spells it normally wouldn't, it doesn't say it ALWAYS necessarily will. For whatever reason, Superb Dispelling doesn't.

Dragons can dig (fast).We have no indication it isn't a variant, either, and while normally this would not be a strong argument, the rules of epic spellcasting mean that the spell would have had to be developed by Xykon himself and not simply taken off the given list of Epic Spells (even if he was researching based on that list).

Developing this spell from the dispel seed means that the seed's "can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic" is incorporated into it, and in the absence of any other actual factor that would cause this to no longer be true (and there aren't any listed anywhere for using a single seed), there's no reason to think that Xykon's version of Superb Dispelling does not also have this benefit. The only real argument against that is a literal interpretation of RAW, and frankly, RAW is essentially never the case in an actual game or story, owing to problems with it like these.

Also would like to note that black dragons, even Ancient ones, have no burrow speed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm#blackDragon), and thus cannot necessarily dig fast using only their own limbs.


By RAW [such and such that happened in the comic lots of times] shouldn't have happened. But it did. So who cares about RAW in those cases, when it's clearly being ignored? Here, the AMF fits around the Dragon for whatever reason. There's no merit is discussing how it might not fit in another universe, because it does fit, we can see it does.Look (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html) again (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0629.html). The ABD clearly does not fit entirely with her own Anti-magic Field, as we can see in the comic itself. The problem with Xykon readying an action against those parts of her that don't fit, of course, is the lack of rules for called shots like that.

If it ever came up in the comic, I'd expect it to be lampshaded by a spellcaster attempting to do exactly that ... and it not working because there's no rules for targeting specific parts of the body. But until we see that, we have to assume that the portions of the ABD outside her own field are vulnerable.

[Nurlithion]

I'm with the poster who said Tarquin's team could probably do it. They're retired high-level adventurers with apparently none of the incompetence of the Order or the Guild.

[Psyren]

But we have no indication this is a variant.

They're all variants, that's the point. You have to build epic spells from scratch.

The dispel seed gives you the default. The example Superb Dispelling in ELH is (in addition to being invalid as written) itself a variant.


And the Epic Dispel Seed CAN overcome other spells it normally wouldn't, it doesn't say it ALWAYS necessarily will. For whatever reason, Superb Dispelling doesn't.

Of course Superb Dispelling can fail. It requires a CL check, just like all spells created using the Dispel Seed would. That's what the "can" is there for - the specific parameters for failure are given right in the seed text.


Dragons can dig (fast).

Being covered in dirt does not allow you to ignore line of effect rules.
And ABDs have no burrow speed.


By RAW [such and such that happened in the comic lots of times] shouldn't have happened. But it did. So who cares about RAW in those cases, when it's clearly being ignored?

If RAW is out the window, Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage blocks AMF and he teleports them to King Kai's planet so their epic battle doesn't harm Equestria. Because plot.


Here, the AMF fits around the Dragon for whatever reason. There's no merit is discussing how it might not fit in another universe, because it does fit, we can see it does.

Her head and wings are outside it, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html) and thus vulnerable:

"Should a creature be larger than the area enclosed by the barrier, any part of it that lies outside the barrier is unaffected by the field. "

[Da'Shain]

I'd also like to point out that Xykon's version would quite likely have no backlash damage, as well. Backlash damage is a way of mitigating the Spellcraft DC on an epic spell, and Superb Dispelling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/superbDispelling.htm)'s 10d6 Backlash damage adds -10 to the DC. However, the reason the spell's DC is so high in the first place is because of the +30 max bonus to the dispel check.

Unless Xykon is actually 40th level, he has no reason whatsoever to make a spell that provides him that much leeway. If he is a 30th level caster or below, he can have simply given his epic spell a +20 bonus (on top of the base 10) and not need to add the backlash damage at all. Indeed, he'd be an idiot to have not done so.

[Nevereatcars]

We know that the IFCC Fiends have access to the souls of multiple epic spellcasters (at least three and probably more, since those three were chosen to exactly compensate for V's weaknesses), and on their own power they were able to put an entire island under a Time Stop effect that lasted for several minutes (a far more powerful effect than a ninth-level spell). They're well above Xykon's power level, if they ever find themselves in a context where they can confront him directly.

Which they can't, because they're forbidden from directly interfering in the affairs of the primary plane (or whatever its called) unless making a deal.

[Math_Mage]

I'd also like to point out that Xykon's version would quite likely have no backlash damage, as well. Backlash damage is a way of mitigating the Spellcraft DC on an epic spell, and Superb Dispelling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/superbDispelling.htm)'s 10d6 Backlash damage adds -10 to the DC. However, the reason the spell's DC is so high in the first place is because of the +30 max bonus to the dispel check.

Unless Xykon is actually 40th level, he has no reason whatsoever to make a spell that provides him that much leeway. If he is a 30th level caster or below, he can have simply given his epic spell a +20 bonus (on top of the base 10) and not need to add the backlash damage at all. Indeed, he'd be an idiot to have not done so.

And we don't see him take any damage when he casts Superb Dispelling on Darth V, so not only is it logical, it's also very likely true.

[Dr.Epic]

Who could beat Xykon? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcxthg885ZY)

[Once&FutureKing]

We DO see him take backlash damage from using it! Good heavens, I am worried about the form of reason people are using. Maybe Xykon's Epic Mage Armour is a homebrew version that also makes him intangible... at a certain point these sorts of ridiculous (unsupported in the text) arguments become self refuting, and obviously agenda driven (to prove that Xykon cannot lose to a lowly Ancient Black Dragon). Not one single viable way of Xykon winning has been advanced, which doesn't involve inventing abilities and powers that are not supported in the text at all.

[CharityB]

And we don't see him take any damage when he casts Superb Dispelling on Darth V, so not only is it logical, it's also very likely true.

Wow.

All this time, I thought Superb Dispelling inflicted damage on the person whose spell got dispelled.

I can't believe I never actually looked at that sentence closely...

[AgentofOdd]

We DO see him take backlash damage from using it!Xykon uses Superb Dispelling here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html). Where exactly is the indication that Xykon took damage from the casting?

[Once&FutureKing]

Xykon uses Superb Dispelling here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html). Where exactly is the indication that Xykon took damage from the casting?

Are you serious. Look more closely, there are at least 3 clear injury marks not previously there, including the 2 white ones.

[zimmerwald1915]

Are you serious. Look more closely, there are at least 3 clear injury marks not previously there, including the 2 white ones.
Those could just as easily be from Bigby's Crushing Hand, which damaged Xykon in panel 2 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0653.html). In every panel showing Xykon between the time his Meteor Swarm destroyed the Hand and the panel where he cast Superb Dispelling, his chest was obscured: by fireballs, and then by his sleeve.

Besides, the Giant tends to make 10d6 damage look more...significant.

[Kaazmodan]

SoTD:
I'd like to hope that Redcloak's niece will have some part to play in either the downfall of Xykon or Redcloak. On p100/panel 6 SotD, Right-Eye says that he managed to smuggle her out of the way of Xykon's rampages. It would be a fun/karma ending to their reign, also tying in some former backstory. Both Redcloak and Xykon, did after all have a great part to play in the killing.

But then killing Xykon himself, no, she will most likely not have a shadow of a chance.

[Once&FutureKing]

utter fantasy. Look at the picture again

[AgentofOdd]

Are you serious. Look more closely, there are at least 3 clear injury marks not previously there, including the 2 white ones.Along with what Zim said, there's zero indication that Superb Dispelling actually did any harm, and there are better ways to show damage then several one pixel wide lines. Have Xykon grunt in discomfort, show some short of magical backlash hitting Xykon, etc.

[Da'Shain]

We DO see him take backlash damage from using it! Good heavens, I am worried about the form of reason people are using. Maybe Xykon's Epic Mage Armour is a homebrew version that also makes him intangible... at a certain point these sorts of ridiculous (unsupported in the text) arguments become self refuting, and obviously agenda driven (to prove that Xykon cannot lose to a lowly Ancient Black Dragon). Not one single viable way of Xykon winning has been advanced, which doesn't involve inventing abilities and powers that are not supported in the text at all.Er ... right.

1) No, we don't. AgentofOdd linked to the comic in question. No new wounds appear on Xykon when he casts Superb Dispelling. Nor is there any other indication that backlash damage has taken place.

2) Epic Spellcasting is different from normal spellcasting. Xykon does not simply pick his epic spells from a list when he levels up. ANY epic spell requires researching. In order to research Superb Dispelling, he would be working from the Dispel seed. The process of researching that spell does not place any new limitations on the seed or its ability to dispel normally non-dispelable effects. The ONLY reason to think such a thing happens is because the example (and I stress: example, because all the epic spells given in the SRD are merely examples of what can be done) given is worded in such a way as to not address the issue and equate it to greater dispel magic, instead.

Quite frankly, any DM worth their salt would go with the actual rules of the epic spellcasting system, not the example writeups (which are notoriously prone to errors throughout 3.5 materials), especially when your interpretation of Superb Dispelling is based on an omission rather than a stated rule.

3) The simplest viable way of Xykon winning? Maximized Energy Drain to start with and the ABD loses all her castings of Anti-Magic Field. Fight goes predictably from there, no epic spellcasting needed. Based on what we know, it's 50-50 Xykon goes first (assuming they begin combat aware of each other); if he doesn't, we're back to Xykon simply taking a 5 foot step out of the AMF each time and either Superb Dispelling it or deciding to just Teleport away, trading action for action. Given that he has at least 28+ charisma, he has far more spell slots to waste than the ABD does; and the ABD can't attack him on any round she uses an AMF in.

Really, the ABD is a one-trick pony in this particular fight; if her AMF goes down, she's toast in about 3 or 4 rounds, while she's highly unlikely to be able to wear down Xykon's 21-30 levels or so of d12 HD in the same period of time with his damage reduction.

[Once&FutureKing]

I just wrote this in green text.

Xykon didn't have the injuries, then he uses S.Dispelling and he does. End of story. You're literally ignoring the picture. He has multiple injuries he clearly didn't have before. But maybe in between panels a rabid squirrel inflicted them... :smallconfused:

EDIT; and I remember when I first read comics 652 and 653 that there was originally no damage in some panels afterwatrds, then subsequently Rich added some damage, updating the comic (though I don't recall the exact parts redrawn).

[AgentofOdd]

K, after looking things over I do notice that Xkyon does show some white slashes on his robe after casting Superb Dispelling. While the one on his chest could be from Crushing Hand, the one that appears on his right sleeve shows up in the panel he casts Superb Dispelling.

EDIT: Incidentally, why you didn't point this our more clearly, especially since the injuries are of a different color than the usual black damage lines on the lich, I have no idea.

[Psyren]

Not one single viable way of Xykon winning has been advanced, which doesn't involve inventing abilities and powers that are not supported in the text at all.

Was "blasting her in her very clearly unprotected face" too farfetched?

One Max Energy Drain and it's bye-bye AMF.

[Silverraptor]

The plot. And probably Rich Burlew.

[Once&FutureKing]

Er ... right.


3) The simplest viable way of Xykon winning? Maximized Energy Drain to start with and the ABD loses all her castings of Anti-Magic Field.

No, it doesn't work that way. Maximized Energy Drain still leaves multiple uses of AMF, and then after that Xykon has no options left.

[Da'Shain]

I just wrote this in green text.

Xykon didn't have the injuries, then he uses S.Dispelling and he does. End of story. You're literally ignoring the picture. He has multiple injuries he clearly didn't have before. But maybe in between panels a rabid squirrel inflicted them... :smallconfused:Or, seeing as he's shifted positions multiple times, wounds he already had are coming into view. The "X" on his chest would have been covered by his left arm in every other panel; the new white mark on his right arm is high up towards his shoulder and would have been covered by his head/cape fastening in earlier panels. Of the two, the mark on his arm is the one that possibly wasn't there at all before, given its position.

Also, while there may indeed be backlash damage in Xykon's version of Superb Dispelling (which I still maintain did not happen, as there is a total of one tiny mark that might indicate it if it was not simply covered before and no evidence of an explosion or backdraft of magical energy), this does not prove the spell is the same version as in the SRD, as A) my earlier point about developing epic spells stands, and B) we have no way of measuring said damage; it could be 10d6, or it could be 5, or 1, etc.

[Da'Shain]

No, it doesn't work that way. Maximized Energy Drain still leaves multiple uses of AMF, and then after that Xykon has no options left.Other than the options I quite clearly laid out, you mean?

EDIT: Ah, one of my assumptions was incorrect. The ABD actually knows 2 7th level spells (Greater Teleport and Finger of Death) rather than the one I thought she did, meaning she must cast as a 15th level Sorceror, meaning that she has 4 level 7 spell slots and 6 level 6 spell slots, for a total of 10 that must be drained before she can't cast AMF anymore. So you are correct, a Maximized Energy Drain at the outset would leave her with 2 castings of AMF.

... which would then be Superb Dispelled and/or simply teleported away from.

Alternately, Xykon could counterspell her casting of AMF. While we don't know for a fact that he has Greater Dispel, two of his 6th level spells are unknown and he's geared for caster-killing, so it's not an unreasonable assumption that Greater Dispel is one of those two. However, I'll admit we don't know for a fact he has this capability.

[Once&FutureKing]

S.Dispel which doesn't do what you think it does in the description unless you make up your own version, which is 30% likely to even WORK against an AMF, which inflicts backlash damage on Xykon, etc. And why exactly does Xykon attack first? And we don't even know if Xykon can DO 2 epic spells in a day! You keep granting him abilities he doesn't have... I can play that game with the Dragon too.

[AgentofOdd]

Anyone capable of getting the epic spellcasting feat will be able to cast at least 2 epic spells per day. The number of epic spells Xykon gets is "number of ranks in Knowledge (arcana) divided by 10 rounded down" and he needs 24 ranks in Knowledge (arcana) to qualify for epic spellcasting.

EDIT: Link to the relevant rule is here (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Epic_Spellcasting).

[Da'Shain]

S.Dispel which doesn't do what you think it does in the description unless you make up your own version, which is 30% likely to even WORK against an AMF, which inflicts backlash damage on Xykon, etc. And why exactly does Xykon attack first? And we don't even know if Xykon can DO 2 epic spells in a day! You keep granting him abilities he doesn't have... I can play that game with the Dragon too.As I said, any DM worth the title would rule that Superb Dispelling can dispel an AMF, because there is precisely one RAW reason not to (an omission in the description) and several RAW reasons to (the dispel seed, the rules of developing epic spells, the rules of epic spells interacting with AMF, etc.) as well as simple common sense.

Where do you get 30% likely to work from? Epic spells vs AMF, the AMF has to succeed on a check of 1d20+20 vs a DC of 11+Epic Spellcaster's level, which for Xykon could theoretically be as low as 11+21 (needing to roll a 12 or higher) but is far more likely to be at least 11+27 (needing to roll an 18 or higher).

Again, I see no evidence of backlash damage aside from possibly the white mark visible on his arm, which I maintain could easily have been simply hidden by Xykon's body position.

I said, assuming Xykon goes first, and then laid out what he would do if he did not go first. As far as we know, both of them have DEX 10 and no Improved Initiative, so it's a coin flip which one goes first.

As AgentofOdd says, the fact that Xykon can cast at least 2 epic spells a day is one of the few things we DO know.

What abilities have I granted him that he doesn't have? The only one I can think of is that he might have Greater Dispelling, which I admitted we don't know he has.

[Once&FutureKing]

As I said, any DM worth the title would rule that Superb Dispelling can dispel an AMF, because there is precisely one RAW reason not to (an omission in the description) and several RAW reasons to (the dispel seed, the rules of developing epic spells, the rules of epic spells interacting with AMF, etc.) as well as simple common sense.
Any DM worth his salt would ignore the actual spell, which specifically says it does not dispel an AMF. Yeh, that's a great way to proceed. And let's remember, the Epic Dispel Seed is vague, it does not say it always dispels all spells that dispel magic cannot, merely that is CAN, not that it ALWAYS WILL, or what the costs of doing so are, etc. To assume it will do so here because you choose to read it in a certain way is frankly inappropriate, because you are at the point where you are writing your own narrative, rather than going off the explicit spells and rules (which should always be the starting point, until we have actual evidence to the contrary... we assume forcecage is forcecage, until we get evidence to the contrary... which we did in that case, and which we have none for here).

To extend this form of logic, to show another reason your reasoning is bad... It would not be difficult to think of spells that it would obviously be absurd for Superb Dispelling to be able to Dispel, but you're not choosing to extend your reasoning to those are you). For instance, dispel magic normally cannot dispel instantaneous spells, even those whose magic continues after the spell is ceased. Should we assume Superb Dispelling can (and always will) dispel those? There are spells which can turn you into a god. Can superb Dispelling dispel those, or would that be silly? You can't pick and choose who you are going to apply a very vaguely worded description in the dispel seed and then apply it as you please.


Where do you get 30% likely to work from? Epic spells vs AMF, the AMF has to succeed on a check of 1d20+20 vs a DC of 11+Epic Spellcaster's level, which for Xykon could theoretically be as low as 11+21 (needing to roll a 12 or higher) but is far more likely to be at least 11+27 (needing to roll an 18 or higher).
Someone else did a calculation earlier, I didn't both to check if it is right, you can do your own calc. However it's not anything like guaranteed to even cast, is it?


Again, I see no evidence of backlash damage aside from possibly the white mark visible on his arm, which I maintain could easily have been simply hidden by Xykon's body position.
2 white marks appear that were not there before, and in addition Xykon has a mark on the bottom front of of cloak that was not there in the earlier panel.


I said, assuming Xykon goes first, and then laid out what he would do if he did not go first. As far as we know, both of them have DEX 10 and no Improved Initiative, so it's a coin flip which one goes first.
Actually black dragons favour improved initiative, but leaving that aside you need to put this into perspective. Energy Drain (even for Xykon) has a range of like 90 feet at best. That's less than the distance the Dragon can travel in his turn (and make 6 non-spell attacks), so we're not talking about Xykon having a little luck here. All the following need to happen:
1) Xykon attacks first
2) Xykon needs superb dispel to do something it doesn't do
3) Superb dispel needs to work (despite low odds it can cast against an AMF) both times. If it fails once, the Dragon charges and grapples Xykon on his turn, and Xykon will be in range because Xykon can't be less than 90 feet away, which means he'd be dead.
Remember, Xykon can't use S.Dispelling as a counter spell because he already used up his turn to cast maximized energy drain. Xykon casts, the Dragon casts. xykon casts again, the Dragon re-casts. Xykon doesn't get two spells per turn.


What abilities have I granted him that he doesn't have? The only one I can think of is that he might have Greater Dispelling, which I admitted we don't know he has.
There is zero evidence he has this, just as there is no evidence he has a customized S.D'ing. On the other hand, if we are to believe the Dragon, she is level 17 (and has even more spells), because she told us she was going to plane shift to another dimension afterwards, it was in fact essential to her plan. I haven't made that assumption, because we didn't see it, but there's more evidence of that than there is of thestuff you're insisting on.

[Kish]

Actually black dragons favour improved initiative, but leaving that aside you need to put this into perspective. Energy Drain (even for Xykon) has a range of like 90 feet at best. That's less than the distance the Dragon can travel in his turn



the Dragon can travel in his turn

his turn


his

his
You know, I can live with the fact that you're arguing that Anti-Magic Field should be god mode, but could you please try to pay attention to the most basic features of the character you're championing for most powerful character in the comic?


If it fails once, the Dragon charges and grapples Xykon on his turn,

:smallsigh:

[Once&FutureKing]

You do understand that when the Dragon moves, the field moves with her, yes?

To put it more charitably, here is what we're being told.

Turn 1:
Xykon (goes first for some reason)- Maximized energy drain
Dragon- AMF

Turn 2:
Xykon- Superb Dispelling (ignoring it's actual description for some reason)- has a low chance of even casting effectively v.s an AMF. There are now 2 possible outcomes:
a) It doesn't cast effectively, in which case the Dragon charges and grapples Xykon. The fight is now over. Or,
b) It casts effectively, in which the Dragon re-casts AMF, and Xykon again has to hope he's lucky with a low odds spell, or the Dragon will again grapple Xykon and the fight is over.

And let's make all these unfavourable assumptions for the Dragon. Xykon can still just fly away and escape (invisibly if she wants), even without assuming she has any further spells, etc. She is much faster than Xykon, and the damage Xykon can inflict on her will be relatively trivial before she escapes (remember, he has only one known 12th level spell slow, so he can't be continually casting maximized meteor swarms here), and using teleport to catch up uses up his turn, by which point the Dragon will have again moved out of his range, and so on, until he runs out of teleports.

And btw, I don't think the Dragon is even close to the most powerful character in the comic. But she'd take Xykon based on the evidence we've seen thus far.

[Kish]

...

I am not getting involved in your debate. I am pointing out that the dragon was not a him.

[Math_Mage]

Actually, going back over the RAW, there is no contradiction. Here's the section that 'supports' an epic dispel being able to handle AMF:


Dispelling, Epic Spells, and Antimagic Field

A lucky nonepic spellcaster casting greater dispel magic might be able to dispel an epic spell. The game mechanics do not change, and epic spells do not occupy any privileged position allowing them to resist being dispelled other than their presumably high caster level. Likewise, epic spells using the dispel seed can dispel nonepic spells. Such epic spells use the same game mechanic: The check to dispel is 1d20 + a specified number (usually dispeller’s level), and the DC is 11 + the spellcaster’s level.

Antimagic field does not automatically suppress epic spells as it does standard spells. Instead, each time an epic spell is subject to an antimagic field, make a dispel check as a 20th-level caster (1d20 + 20). The epic spell has a DC of 11 + the epic spell’s spellcaster level. If the suppression check is successful, the epic spell is suppressed like any other spell. If the dispel check is unsuccessful, the epic spell functions normally.

The key here is that epic spells can dispel nonepic spells, but with the qualifier that the same mechanics (hence limitations) apply. Since AMF cannot be removed by Dispel Magic, it cannot be removed by its cousins, even its epic cousins.

[Da'Shain]

Any DM worth his salt would ignore the actual spell, which specifically says it does not dispel an AMF. Yeh, that's a great way to proceed. And let's remember, the Epic Dispel Seed is vague, it does not say it always dispels all spells that dispel magic cannot, merely that is CAN, not that it ALWAYS WILL, or what the costs of doing so are, etc. To assume it will do so here because you choose to read it in a certain way is frankly inappropriate, because you are at the point where you are writing your own narrative, rather than going off the explicit spells and rules (which should always be the starting point, until we have actual evidence to the contrary... we assume forcecage is forcecage, until we get evidence to the contrary... which we did in that case, and which we have none for here).Where does it specifically state that Superb Dispelling does not dispel an AMF? It merely says that Superb Dispelling works as Greater Dispel does, and does not mention how it fares against an AMF, even though being based on an epic seed the rules have changed. The Dispel seed is not vague on this point. Spells created from it can dispel those spells that were immune to normal dispelling, because the dispel seed ON ITS OWN "can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic". There is no cost to doing so, there is no indication that there will be costs for doing so, and there is nothing in the epic spell development rules that will add any barriers to this.

I'm not "choosing" to read it in a certain way: I stated, very clearly, that there is precisely one reason to rule that Superb Dispelling does not work against an AMF, and several reasons not to, both in RAW and in RAI.

Again, epic spells are not like regular spells. Forcecage is Forcecage, yes, but that's because it's merely a spell picked off of a standardized list. Epic spells are not like that. Epic spells require casters to individually research each one, creating it from scratch. The epic spell list given in the SRD is a list of examples, not a standardized list, and thus we can't assume that they will match exactly with what each individual caster creates for themselves.


To extend this form of logic, to show another reason your reasoning is bad... It would not be difficult to think of spells that it would obviously be absurd for Superb Dispelling to be able to Dispel, but you're not choosing to extend your reasoning to those are you). For instance, dispel magic normally cannot dispel instantaneous spells, even those whose magic continues after the spell is case. Should we assume Superb Dispelling can (and always will) dispel those? There are spells which can turn you into a god. Can superb Dispelling dispel those, or would that be silly? You can't pick and choose who you are going to apply a very vaguely worded description in the dispel seed and then apply it as you please.Again, it's not vague. "The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/dispel.htm)" It would not apply to instantaneous spells cast in the past, because there is no longer a spell at work to defeat. I'm not picking and choosing where I'm going to apply it, and I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth.



Someone else did a calculation earlier, I didn't both to check if it is right, you can do your own calc. However it's not anything like guaranteed to even cast, is it?It's not guaranteed, no. It does, at the very, very least, have a 55% chance of casting (requiring a roll of 12 or greater on a d20) if Xykon is level 21, and if Xykon is level 27 or greater as is far more likely, it has at least an 85% chance (requiring a roll of 18 or greater). It's more likely to work than not.



2 white marks appear that were not there before, and in addition Xykon has a mark on the bottom front of of cloak that was not there in the earlier panel.I reiterate: the cross-mark on his abdomen would assuredly have been hidden by his left arm's placement in earlier panels, and the white mark on his sleeve could have been hidden by his shoulder and cloak clasp in earlier panels, as he was not reaching as far out beforehand. The black mark on the bottom front of Xykon's cloak is clearly visible in panels 2 and 5.



Actually black dragons favour improved initiative, but leaving that aside you need to put this into perspective. Energy Drain (even for Xykon) has a range of like 90 feet at best. That's less than the distance the Dragon can travel in his turn (and make 6 non-spell attacks), so we're not talking about Xykon having a little luck here. Dragons favor improved Initiative, yes; among a list of 11 general feats plus any useful metamagic feats. It's possible she has it; it's also possible that Xykon has it. Also, the dragon can't charge and use 6 attacks in one turn; its 6 attacks are its full attack, which require a full round action.


All the following need to happen:
1) Xykon attacks first
2) Xykon needs superb dispel to do something it doesn't do
3) Superb dispel needs to work (despite low odds it can cast against an AMF) both times. If it fails once, the Dragon charges and grapples Xykon on his turn, and Xykon will be in range because Xykon can't be less than 90 feet away, which means he'd be dead.
Remember, Xykon can't use S.Dispelling as a counter spell because he already used up his turn to cast maximized energy drain. Xykon casts, the Dragon casts. xykon casts again, the Dragon re-casts. Xykon doesn't get two spells per turn.1) Why does Xykon need to attack first?
2) Obviously this is addressed earlier.
3)
Superb Dispelling does not have a low chance of working.
The dragon grappling Xykon will do precisely nil if her Antimagic Field isn't up, as Xykon has Still Spell and can use it on any level of his spells. In fact, grappling him without AMF would probably be the worst move for her, since she could then not cast AMF herself and would do far less damage to him from grappling than she could with full attacks or possibly magic.
The dragon cannot grapple Xykon on the same turn as she puts up her Antimagic Field. If she puts up AMF and moves next to Xykon, he can simply 5-foot step out and act as normal.


When did I say Xykon got two spells per turn? If Xykon goes first, he maximized energy drains her; she casts one of her two remaining AMFs, he dispels it, she casts her last one, he dispels it. If Xykon doesn't go first, she either attacks or casts AMF; if she casts AMF, Xykon may dispel it, or may opt to simply teleport away, and if she attacks return to the first scenario.


There is zero evidence he has this, just as there is no evidence he has a customized S.D'ing. On the other hand, if we are to believe the Dragon, she is level 17 (and has even more spells), because she told us she was going to plane shift to another dimension afterwards, it was in fact essential to her plan. I haven't made that assumption, because we didn't see it, but there's more evidence of that than there is of thestuff you're insisting on.I admitted that we don't know he has this, yes. No real need to repeat that fact. However, knowing that he has two as yet unknown 6th level spells AND that he seems built to take on enemy casters, it'd be a fairly logical thing for him to have.

Compare that to the idea of the ABD being caster level 17, which would require that she possess 6 levels of Sorceror rather than 3, being used as an explanation of how she would leave the material plane. It posits that she be three entire levels higher than she appears to be in order to explain something that could easily be accomplished with a scroll, a naturally occurring gate, a caster friend or even a coerced cleric. She doesn't say that she herself intends to cast Plane Shift; she says "I will leave this plane of existence ..." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0629.html)


Another solid spell for Xykon in such a fight: Greater Invisibility. As long as he stays more than 60 feet away, the ABD would have to dismiss her AMF to find him. It's not a gamewinner because of the ABD's blindsense, but it'll make things more frustrating. And, of course, the aforementioned Ghostform tactic of simply floating into the ground would work.

[KoboldRevenge]

Would the AMF render useless Xykons paralyzing touch? Would his touch even affect Mom Dragon? It could even a magic-less fight between the two.
Now that I think about it shouldn't a Lich held together by magic, fall limp in a pile of bones when exposed to an AMF?

[Da'Shain]

Actually, going back over the RAW, there is no contradiction. Here's the section that 'supports' an epic dispel being able to handle AMF:

The key here is that epic spells can dispel nonepic spells, but with the qualifier that the same mechanics (hence limitations) apply. Since AMF cannot be removed by Dispel Magic, it cannot be removed by its cousins, even its epic cousins.The rules you quoted do not cover whether an AMF can be dispelled by epic magic, and merely state that epic spells dispelling nonepic spells use the same mechanic, not that they are subject to the same limitations. If there was no other specific mention of the interaction, I would agree that this position is an interpretation that fits the rules, but the dispel seed clearly states that it can defeat even spells which are not normally subject to dispel magic, which clearly encompasses AMF.

[Psyren]

Actually, going back over the RAW, there is no contradiction. Here's the section that 'supports' an epic dispel being able to handle AMF:



The key here is that epic spells can dispel nonepic spells, but with the qualifier that the same mechanics (hence limitations) apply. Since AMF cannot be removed by Dispel Magic, it cannot be removed by its cousins, even its epic cousins.

Incorrect. The section that deal with epic dispels handling AMF is in the Dispel Seed. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/dispel.htm)


The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic.

Emphasis mine. And to further distance it from non-epic dispels:


The dispel seed can dispel (but not counter) the ongoing effects of supernatural abilities as well as spells, and it affects spell-like effects just as it affects spells.

Yes, even supernatural abilities can be dispelled by the dispel seed. There isn't a single non-epic dispel in any sourcebook that can do that, so claiming parity between epic dispels and non-epic dispels is silly.

[Math_Mage]

Incorrect. The section that handles epic dispels handling AMF is in the Dispel Seed. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/dispel.htm)



Emphasis mine. And to further distance it from non-epic dispels:



Yes, even supernatural abilities can be dispelled by the dispel seed. There isn't a single non-epic dispel in any sourcebook that can do that, so claiming parity between epic dispels and non-epic dispels is silly.

Ah. I fail at sourcebook searching, then. Specific trumps general, and the epic distinction trumps dispel parity. All right. RAW Superb Dispelling works on an AMF, even if the spell description itself doesn't explicitly override all the dispel exceptions.

That said, if there's some other way for Xykon to get around the AMF, that would be nice. Heck, with even a little CL boosting, Finger of Death alone gives Xykon a better-than-even chance of one-shotting the round if he can land his spells.

[Psyren]

That said, if there's some other way for Xykon to get around the AMF, that would be nice. Heck, with even a little CL boosting, Finger of Death alone gives Xykon a better-than-even chance of one-shotting the round if he can land his spells.

He doesn't really need to boost his CL - all that would affect would be his chance to overcome her SR, and ABDs only have 25. Even if he's only 21, that means he has an 80% chance to beat it, never mind if he's 27 or more.

What he needs to concentrate on instead are his save DCs. She has a +23 fort so that is the toughest avenue for him to attack. He might be better off with a will save, such as the charm spell he used in SoD, or his bouncy ball of Insanity.

[Math_Mage]

He doesn't really need to boost his CL - all that would affect would be his chance to overcome her SR, and ABDs only have 25. Even if he's only 21, that means he has an 80% chance to beat it, never mind if he's 27 or more.

What he needs to concentrate on instead are his save DCs. She has a +23 fort so that is the toughest avenue for him to attack. He might be better off with a will save, such as the charm spell he used in SoD, or his bouncy ball of Insanity.

Blah, I keep messing up my characteristics. Shows how long it's been since I played anything. X needs Cha-boosting, not CL-boosting. And yeah, any of his other SoLs would probably work better.

[SaintRidley]

Someone else did a calculation earlier, I didn't both to check if it is right, you can do your own calc.

That was me. And you're putting the numbers backwards on what my calculation shows - Xykon, assuming level 24 and no caster level boosts at all, has a 70% success chance of casting any epic spell in an antimagic field. 30% is the failure rate, not the success rate.

I chose level 24 as an arbitrary point in early epic levels. The calculation based upon it is correct for that number. If Xykon is level 27, then he succeeds 85% of the time.

Please be more careful in citing numbers in the future.

[ZerglingOne]

In an anti-magic field, Roy with a great club and about 10-15 fun rounds of crunching sound ridden combat.

The only epic spells we know he can cast are supreme dispelling and cloister. the former able to remove the AMF, but if he wastes a round doing this, whatever was being used to cause the AMF on the area may refresh it a round later rendering him fairly useless.

Dorukan could have easily defeated him 1v1 with even a tiny bit of proper preparation.

Oh, Durkon + Roy, Roy grapples Xykon, Durkon casts a few heals on Xykon, if he accidentally hits Roy, big deal. If they hadn't cast Protection from Fire with full knowledge of him having the Meteor Swarm spell, they'd be mentally challenged. Even with successful saving throws, 75 damage is a lot.

[Once&FutureKing]

Ok, there's alot of stuff to get through here:

1. Superb Dispelling doesn't negate an AMF, that's extremely clear on reading it. And unless we have reason to imagine that this is not the standard Superb Dispelling (we don't), then we shouldn't be granting it (vague) abilities that a hypothetical epic dispel could have (or could not have, depending on the spell).
2. Dragons are immune to paralysis, so no, Xykon can't use that to win.

Ok, now Dasain:

Where does it specifically state that Superb Dispelling does not dispel an AMF? It merely says that Superb Dispelling works as Greater Dispel does, and does not mention how it fares against an AMF,
See, this would mean something, if Greater Dispel didn't tell us how it fared against an AMF... but it does, and Great Dispel does nothing to an AMF. This is bad for Superb Dispelling, because it is described as "just like Greater Dispel, but with a higher caster check (and backlash damage)" (paraphrased). It literally couldn't be any clearer how the spell works.


even though being based on an epic seed the rules have changed.
This is just narrative from you. The Dispel Seed says it CAN affect things it normally couldn't. CAN. I think the part that's confusing you is that "can" does not equal "will" or "must" or "always shall", it means it CAN, but not that it necessarily WILL. So sure, a hypothetical spell made from scratch using the Dispel Seed could dispel an AMF... except we have no more reason to believe this is a hypothetical spell than we do to believe Xykon's Epic Mage Armour also allows him to get a deflection bonus and become intangible. It's not impossible, but we have no reason to suppose it. Sometimes Rich makes spells that are not accurate with their descriptions (Death Ward for instance), but we have no evidence this is one such spell except that it suits your argument.


The Dispel seed is not vague on this point. Spells created from it can dispel those spells that were immune to normal dispelling, because the dispel seed ON ITS OWN "can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic".
That word... I do not think it means what you think it means...


There is no cost to doing so, there is no indication that there will be costs for doing so, and there is nothing in the epic spell development rules that will add any barriers to this.

This is just made up. Many Epic Spells have costs, many Epic Dispel Seed based spells have costs... take for instance, SUPERB DISPELLING, which inflicts backlash damage on the caster for using it.


The epic spell list given in the SRD is a list of examples, not a standardized list, and thus we can't assume that they will match exactly with what each individual caster creates for themselves.
I'm sorry but this is just wrong. Wizards can invent their own non-epic spells too (Xykon's moderately escapable forcecage, Durkon's Mass Death Ward, etc), the fact they can do this doesn't mean the standard spells they can learn are just "examples" and don't have the normal parameters when used.


It would not apply to instantaneous spells cast in the past, because there is no longer a spell at work to defeat.
This is also false. Many spells which are instantaneous continue to function after the "instant" part of the spell. For just one example, Gate; it summons a creature instantly, yes, but even after that it continues to exercise a degree of control over the creature, and the creatures are sent back to their point of origin afterwards regardless of whether they can get their under their own power. So some sort of magic is clearly transporting them back home, something that looks just like gate in fact, despite your spell having been supposedly "instant" and "over". Imprisonment is another good example.


Also, the dragon can't charge and use 6 attacks in one turn; its 6 attacks are its full attack, which require a full round action.
The Dragon does not NEED to charge AND Attack 6 times, because the Dragon only needs to attack once (grapple) and it's over. In fact, the Dragon doesn't need to attack at all, only get within the same space as Xykon (so they're both in the AMF), and then it's over, because even if Xykon flies/moves out of the field, he ALSO cannot move and cast at the same time (which is why this remark "If she puts up AMF and moves next to Xykon, he can simply 5-foot step out and act as normal" is so annoying... you seem to think Xykon can do what you realise the Dragon cannot, which is move and cast at the same time), which means the Dragon (who is faster) can cover the distance he's moved before he can cast. Once Xykon is in the field (even if he was not grappled for some reason), he can't move out of the field AND THEN TELEPORT, because it is not his turn anymore, and obviously the next thing the Dragon will do is move back next to him again, etc. This is all assuming of course the Dragon doesn't just grapple him, as she can.


When did I say Xykon got two spells per turn? If Xykon goes first, he maximized energy drains her; she casts one of her two remaining AMFs, he dispels it, she casts her last one, he dispels it. If Xykon doesn't go first, she either attacks or casts AMF; if she casts AMF, Xykon may dispel it, or may opt to simply teleport away, and if she attacks return to the first scenario.
It's like pulling teeth with you, so I am going to break it down. Here's where you're going wrong (and please read this next part carefully this time):
Xykon has to be within 90 feet in order to cast Energy Drain... this is important because the Dragon can move more than 90 feet within a single turn. Why? Let's break it down.

Turn 1 (assume Xykon goes first, since he has to in order to avoid a 2 turn death).
:xykon: Maximized Energy Drain
Dragon- "AMF"

:xykon: S.Dispelling (which btw, doesn't work the way you think it does, but let's just humour you for the moment - 85% chance of it working)
A) If it works, Dragon- AMF
B) If it fails, Dragon moves to Xykon's position and grapples him. Fight is over for xykon.
[Option C is the Dragon just teleports off]

:xykon: S.Dispelling (85% chance of "working")
A) If it works, Dragon- flies away (the Dragon would have a fair chance of charging and killing Xykon before he can take her out, especially given he's just lost up to 66% of his hit points, but that strategy could fail so I don't want to get bogged down in it... so assume she runs off
B) If it fails, Dragon moves to Xykon's position and grapples him. Fight is over for Xykon.

Now please remember, if the Dragon flies off, Xykon cannot catch her. I realise you are playing all these real time scenarios in your mind where Xykon teleports after her, fires meteor swarm, etc. These do not work in D&D mechanics... because Xykon cannot teleport and attack in the same turn, and because the Dragon will no longer be where Xykon is by the time he can attack. Also because it will take a huge amount of attacks for Xykon to kill the Dragon (who can turn invisible, plane shift, possibly teleport still, etc).

If the Dragon attacks first (very likely), then the Dragon casts AMF first turn every time. At that point the Dragon has a minimum of 8 uses of AMF, while Xykon would almost surely not have 8 Superb Dispellings (and hasn't given us any certain proof he can cast more than 1-2). 8 Superb Dispels would kill Xykon from backlash damage. If he fails on a single one, the Dragon charges and grapples him (again, assuming it would work, which it won't, because Superb Dispelling specifically doesn't affect an AMF!)

[Psyren]

1. Superb Dispelling doesn't negate an AMF, that's extremely clear on reading it.


Seed: dispel (DC 19)

It's about as clear as mud.



I'm sorry but this is just wrong. Wizards can invent their own non-epic spells too (Xykon's moderately escapable forcecage, Durkon's Mass Death Ward, etc), the fact they can do this doesn't mean the standard spells they can learn are just "examples" and don't have the normal parameters when used.

Not the same thing. ALL Epic Spells are developed from scratch, that is how you learn them. The only "normal parameters" are those of the seeds themselves.

[Fish]

I realize this thread is all about speculation, but it's gone on and on about a minute aspect of D&D epic dispel rules for two pages now. Can't you agree that yes, under certain conditions, Xykon could be beaten by an ancient black dragon, and leave it at that? I didn't think the thread was asking which character could deliver a guaranteed beat-down, just possibilities.

[Psyren]

If the circumstance in question is "he's not actually Xykon," then yes, I can agree to that.

(Or maybe "he's not taking the battle seriously")

[BaronOfHell]

I tried to read the thread a little bit.
Even IF you can't superb dispel an AMF (and in which case I think it'd be overpowered), then as far as I understood, depending on Xykon, there's at least a 80-90% chance of each epic spell actually working.

I'm not too familiar with the game rules, but I find it incredibly unlikely that the black dragon will triumph with an AMF doing nothing but granting 10-20% chance of the first few incomming spells not working.

Edit: Come to think about it. Should the ABD not have used AMF after it ate Darth V, or does shapechange bypass an AMF?

[Fish]

That's just silly, Psyren. Rich has said he doesn't take great care to follow RAW, and characters don't always make optimum choices. Either of them could win — it doesn't have to be an even 50-50 chance, it just has to be a non-zero chance.

It's a shame, because this could've been an interesting discussion. Instead it's a nerd fight. :)

[LudiDrizzt]

Does the ABD even FIT in an anti-magic field?

What are the rules regarding creatures larger than medium and emanations?

[Da'Shain]

Response to Once&FutureKing spoilered for length.

See, this would mean something, if Greater Dispel didn't tell us how it fared against an AMF... but it does, and Great Dispel does nothing to an AMF. This is bad for Superb Dispelling, because it is described as "just like Greater Dispel, but with a higher caster check (and backlash damage)" (paraphrased). It literally couldn't be any clearer how the spell works.Again. We know the rules have changed, because spells developed from the Dispel seed have the properties of the dispel seed unless those properties have been nullified somehow. There is precisely one reason to think this is the case, the fact that the spell's text does not actually mention this change; the fact that greater dispel magic cannot do so is irrelevant, because the rules have changed. There are several reasons to believe it's not the case, among them the Dispel seed, the rules for developing epic spells, the rules of AMF interacting with epic magic, the spell text of AMF itself (which acknowledges that some magical effects will be able to dispel it, just not Dispel Magic specifically), and simple common sense, which for anyone who's actually played this game would indicate that, hey, perhaps epic magic should be able to defeat a 6th level spell?


This is just narrative from you. The Dispel Seed says it CAN affect things it normally couldn't. CAN. I think the part that's confusing you is that "can" does not equal "will" or "must" or "always shall", it means it CAN, but not that it necessarily WILL."Can" means has the ability to do so. There is nothing in the epic spell development rules that would remove this ability when the Dispel seed is used on its own. There is nothing in Superb Dispelling to say that this ability is blocked, hindered or removed in any way. As such, the ability remains.


So sure, a hypothetical spell made from scratch using the Dispel Seed could dispel an AMF... except we have no more reason to believe this is a hypothetical spell than we do to believe Xykon's Epic Mage Armour also allows him to get a deflection bonus and become intangible. It's not impossible, but we have no reason to suppose it. Sometimes Rich makes spells that are not accurate with their descriptions (Death Ward for instance), but we have no evidence this is one such spell except that it suits your argument.The earlier argument about Superb Dispelling's wording means that even if it's not a spell made from scratch and simply chosen from a list it retains the properties of the Dispel seed.

However, again. Epic spells are different. "Epic spells are spells developed from the ground up using a list of magical ingredients called seeds." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsIntro.htm) Literally the first words in its entry. We do have a reason to believe Xykon made it from scratch, because all epic spells are made from scratch, even those based on a preexisting entry.


This is just made up. Many Epic Spells have costs, many Epic Dispel Seed based spells have costs... take for instance, SUPERB DISPELLING, which inflicts backlash damage on the caster for using it.You misunderstand. Of course epic spells have costs of some sort. What does not have a cost listed anywhere is the Dispel seed's ability to defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel. It is an intrinsic part of the seed itself.


I'm sorry but this is just wrong. Wizards can invent their own non-epic spells too (Xykon's moderately escapable forcecage, Durkon's Mass Death Ward, etc), the fact they can do this doesn't mean the standard spells they can learn are just "examples" and don't have the normal parameters when used.Again. Non-epic spells are literally chosen off a list with no cost and no need to develop them. Casters can theoretically research new ones; however, there's no actual rules for this, and the system is based off of people just picking their spells at level up. Epic spells do not work that way.


This is also false. Many spells which are instantaneous continue to function after the "instant" part of the spell. For just one example, Gate; it summons a creature instantly, yes, but even after that it continues to exercise a degree of control over the creature, and the creatures are sent back to their point of origin afterwards regardless of whether they can get their under their own power. So some sort of magic is clearly transporting them back home, something that looks just like gate in fact, despite your spell having been supposedly "instant" and "over". Imprisonment is another good example.For Gate, the actual Gate itself can't be dispelled as it's instantaneous; however, the compulsion on "non-unique" creatures is clearly magical and I, personally, would rule that Superb Dispelling can dispel that. By the rules, though, Superb Dispelling would most likely not work for this purpose, and it certainly wouldn't be able to dispel a future Gate/Plane Shift/whatever being opened that allows the called creature to return home.

Likewise for Imprisonment: Since there is technically no ongoing magic, Superb Dispelling would do nothing, unless the DM ruled that the suspended animation the subject is put in is identical to Temporal Stasis, in which case the stasis could be dispelled but not the physical imprisonment itself.



The Dragon does not NEED to charge AND Attack 6 times, because the Dragon only needs to attack once (grapple) and it's over. In fact, the Dragon doesn't need to attack at all, only get within the same space as Xykon (so they're both in the AMF), and then it's over, because even if Xykon flies/moves out of the field, he ALSO cannot move and cast at the same time (which is why this remark "If she puts up AMF and moves next to Xykon, he can simply 5-foot step out and act as normal" is so annoying... you seem to think Xykon can do what you realise the Dragon cannot, which is move and cast at the same time), which means the Dragon (who is faster) can cover the distance he's moved before he can cast. Once Xykon is in the field (even if he was not grappled for some reason), he can't move out of the field AND THEN TELEPORT, because it is not his turn anymore, and obviously the next thing the Dragon will do is move back next to him again, etc. This is all assuming of course the Dragon doesn't just grapple him, as she can.I'm sorry, but ... have you actually played this game that you're arguing advanced rules in?

The Dragon cannot cast AMF and attack (whether one or six times) at all on the same turn, because casting AMF is a standard action, attacking is a standard or full action, and you only get one standard action per turn. You can move and cast a spell just fine; you just can't cast a spell, move, and then attack in the same turn.

The dragon cannot "cover the same distance before Xykon casts" unless she readies an action to do so, something she could not do if she had cast AMF the round before. Each person's turn is their own turn; if Xykon moves 5 feet and then casts a spell on his turn, the ABD's superior move speed does not mean that she can immediately act on his turn. If the ABD's turn is "Standard: cast AMF. Move: Move next to Xykon." then Xykon's turn will simply be "Move: Move out of the bounds of the AMF. Standard: Cast (insert spell here)." He might provoke attacks of opportunity depending on how and where he moves; this is the only way the ABD could act on his turn.


Turn 1 (assume Xykon goes first, since he has to in order to avoid a 2 turn death).
:xykon: Maximized Energy Drain
Dragon- "AMF"

:xykon: S.Dispelling (which btw, doesn't work the way you think it does, but let's just humour you for the moment - 85% chance of it working)
A) If it works, Dragon- AMF
B) If it fails, Dragon moves to Xykon's position and grapples him. Fight is over for xykon.
[Option C is the Dragon just teleports off]A) And rinse and repeat, since this will be its last casting of AMF.
B) If it fails, then yes, the fight is likely to be over if the Dragon succeeds on a grapple check within the AMF.
C) Unless the Dragon has the 5th level Teleport as a known spell (which we don't know), she cannot just Teleport off after she's been energy drained, because she won't have the spell slots to do so. This is a possibility, but not a sure thing at all.


:xykon: S.Dispelling (85% chance of "working")
A) If it works, Dragon- flies away (the Dragon would have a fair chance of charging and killing Xykon before he can take her out, especially given he's just lost up to 66% of his hit points, but that strategy could fail so I don't want to get bogged down in it... so assume she runs off
B) If it fails, Dragon moves to Xykon's position and grapples him. Fight is over for Xykon.A) Um .. what has Xykon lost up to 66% of his hit points from? Where did you even get that number from?
B) Again, yes. If Superb Dispelling fails and the Dragon gets a grapple on him inside an AMF, then the fight is over. (Not that Xykon will actually die, but he'd lose.)


Now please remember, if the Dragon flies off, Xykon cannot catch her. I realise you are playing all these real time scenarios in your mind where Xykon teleports after her, fires meteor swarm, etc. These do not work in D&D mechanics... because Xykon cannot teleport and attack in the same turn, and because the Dragon will no longer be where Xykon is by the time he can attack. Also because it will take a huge amount of attacks for Xykon to kill the Dragon (who can turn invisible, plane shift, possibly teleport still, etc).Greater Invisibility, Greater Teleport to a spot ahead of her, Energy Drain. Rinse and repeat.

Alternately, after one or two Energy Drains, simply Finger of Death her; her saves will be in the gutter by that point and she's likely to fail.

I will grant that the ABD can turn invisible, though, so she could quite possibly escape even without Teleporting. Considering how many he has to spare, though, Xykon can Teleport any time he wants to if he is not grappled in an AMF. Both of them have a good chance of escaping. I will not grant that the ABD can Plane Shift, though, because we have no evidence that she can at that moment in time.


If the Dragon attacks first (very likely),If by "very" you mean a 50/50 chance, yes.
then the Dragon casts AMF first turn every time. At that point the Dragon has a minimum of 8 uses of AMF, while Xykon would almost surely not have 8 Superb Dispellings (and hasn't given us any certain proof he can cast more than 1-2).He can assuredly cast 2 and possibly 3; unlikely that he can cast more. If the dragon keeps on casting AMFs, Xykon will just Teleport out.
8 Superb Dispels would kill Xykon from backlash damage.Which his version likely doesn't have.
If he fails on a single one, the Dragon charges and grapples him (again, assuming it would work, which it won't, because Superb Dispelling specifically doesn't affect an AMF!)Agreed that if Xykon is grappled inside an AMF the fight is over. Disagreed, obviously, that Superb Dispelling won't affect an AMF.


I realize this thread is all about speculation, but it's gone on and on about a minute aspect of D&D epic dispel rules for two pages now. Can't you agree that yes, under certain conditions, Xykon could be beaten by an ancient black dragon, and leave it at that? I didn't think the thread was asking which character could deliver a guaranteed beat-down, just possibilities.
... It's a shame, because this could've been an interesting discussion. Instead it's a nerd fight. :)If it's not clear, I do agree that the ABD has a chance to defeat Xykon; I merely took issue with the idea that Xykon has no way in which to fight her.

And by all means, continue your incredibly non-nerdy discussion of who can defeat who in a fictional webcomic based on D&D. :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

That's just silly, Psyren. Rich has said he doesn't take great care to follow RAW, and characters don't always make optimum choices. Either of them could win — it doesn't have to be an even 50-50 chance, it just has to be a non-zero chance.

It's a shame, because this could've been an interesting discussion. Instead it's a nerd fight. :)

"Whichever one Rich wants to win" is of course the correct answer. It's also the most boring, so it's not the one being considered in this thread.


Does the ABD even FIT in an anti-magic field?

What are the rules regarding creatures larger than medium and emanations?

"Should a creature be larger than the area enclosed by the barrier, any part of it that lies outside the barrier is unaffected by the field." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/antimagicField.htm)

[Roxxy]

I hope that, at the end, Redcloak proves to be the BBEG, not Xykon. I think that having Redcloak prove able to outsmart and manipulate Xykon so thoroughly to make RC the true main villain would be an awesome twist.

In an actual fight, Xykon can beat pretty much anybody who isn't a deity. In the guile arena, however, I cast my vote for Redcloak.

[Fitzclowningham]

Apologies if I have this wrong, but we know that Xykon has both Teleport and Still Spell. Doesn't that mean he can 'port out of being grappled at will, provided he has any 6th or higher spells left?

Edit: Duh, but not in an AMF. Sorry.

[Psyren]

I think the Order (at least collectively) has him matched on intellect and cunning, though. V was able to anticipate and counter his rampant use of periodicals, and Haley quickly saw through his 3 Xykons ruse. Provided they can keep him off-balance, Roy and Durkon should be able to bring the necessary muscle to bear.

[Once&FutureKing]

I tried to read the thread a little bit.
Even IF you can't superb dispel an AMF (and in which case I think it'd be overpowered), then as far as I understood, depending on Xykon, there's at least a 80-90% chance of each epic spell actually working.

I'm not too familiar with the game rules, but I find it incredibly unlikely that the black dragon will triumph with an AMF doing nothing but granting 10-20% chance of the first few incomming spells not working.

Edit: Come to think about it. Should the ABD not have used AMF after it ate Darth V, or does shapechange bypass an AMF?

No, you don't get it, there's an 85% chance his Epic spells will work against the field... and those Epic spells are useless against the dragon, Cloister which doesn't hurt the dragon, epic mage armour (which just delays how long the Dragon takes to beat Xykon's skeleton to dust while grappled in an AMF) and Superb Dispelling (which will have an 85% chance of "casting normally" v.s the AMF, but will have a 0% chance of "dismissing the field" because it's description tells us it doesn't work on AMF's (Disjunction does though, and certain other spells continue to function in an AMF).

[KoboldRevenge]

Shouldn't this thread be called "Who could take out both Xykon and Redcloak at the same time, then destroy X's Phylactery?"
It would be the most likely scenario.:smallamused:

[Once&FutureKing]

Again. We know the rules have changed, because spells developed from the Dispel seed have the properties of the dispel seed unless those properties have been nullified somehow. There is precisely one reason to think this is the case, the fact that the spell's text does not actually mention this change; the fact that greater dispel magic cannot do so is irrelevant, because the rules have changed. There are several reasons to believe it's not the case, among them the Dispel seed, the rules for developing epic spells,

There is no reason to believe it's not the case, because you continue to believe the word "can" is the same as the word "will". You are also pushing a made up narrative that all Epic Spells listed should always be assumed not to work as the description says, because they're "just examples", so when someone casts "vengeful gaze of god" I should apparently be unsurprising when they fire dire kittens at me. This is nonsensical.


the rules of AMF interacting with epic magic,
Either this is a throw away line intended to mislead other readers, or it's further evidence of you inventing your own narrative for the rules. The "rules" of the AMF interacting with Epic magic are whether said magic will CAST AT ALL, not whether the spells will do something they aren't described as having the ability to do! But it gets better...


and simple common sense, which for anyone who's actually played this game would indicate that, hey, perhaps epic magic should be able to defeat a 6th level spell?
You just gave the perfect example of how an Epic spell shouldn't always defeat a 6th level spell, because epic magic only has a chance of working against it, just like disjunction (a 9th level spell) has only a chance of working on an AMF, just like maximized/empowered disintegrate is a more damaging spell them Meteor Swarm, just like the lowly Black Tentacles spell is amazingly effective against higher level powers. This is terrible logic.


the spell text of AMF itself (which acknowledges that some magical effects will be able to dispel it, just not Dispel Magic specifically),
Emphasis added... it's kind of an important part, isn't it? Especially when the description for S.Dispelling is literally "just like Dispel Magic, but with a higher caster check (plus backlash damage)" (paraphrased).


"Can" means has the ability to do so. There is nothing in the epic spell development rules that would remove this ability when the Dispel seed is used on its own. There is nothing in Superb Dispelling to say that this ability is blocked, hindered or removed in any way.
Except of course for the description of Superb Dispelling, which gives the spell no such ability, and says it functions "just like" a spell which explicitly doesn't work on AMF, but "it has a higher caster check". In addition, using your logic for a moment here (and this will take a stiff drink), there's no logical reason to explain why S.Dispelling causes you backlash damage, that just seems unfair given what it does (and doesn't flow from the seed), but it doesn't matter, cos that's the spell description (NB- Xykon gets 3 additional injuries from using it too).


As such, the ability remains.
Well, according to your own personal made up rules. Not according to the actual rules of the spell.




However, again. Epic spells are different. "Epic spells are spells developed from the ground up using a list of magical ingredients called seeds." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsIntro.htm) Literally the first words in its entry. We do have a reason to believe Xykon made it from scratch, because all epic spells are made from scratch, even those based on a preexisting entry.
Dude, every spell can be developed (including Durkon's homebrew Death Ward). That doesn't mean that the text book spells given to us should be ignored. If this was a homebrew version, then sure, you've got an argument. But if there's no evidence it's homebrew (ala Death Ward or Forcecage) then the assumption is it isn't, and no matter how many times you repeat "epic spells are different" it won't matter, because it's a narrative you made up (that all Epic spells listed are just "examples" and people can who use them must be using their own personal version that can't function in the same way, just because you don't want it to).


You misunderstand. Of course epic spells have costs of some sort. What does not have a cost listed anywhere is the Dispel seed's ability to defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel. It is an intrinsic part of the seed itself.
"Can". Again, this word is important too.


For Gate, the actual Gate itself can't be dispelled as it's instantaneous; however, the compulsion on "non-unique" creatures is clearly magical and I, personally, would rule that Superb Dispelling can dispel that. By the rules, though, Superb Dispelling would most likely not work for this purpose, and it certainly wouldn't be able to dispel a future Gate/Plane Shift/whatever being opened that allows the called creature to return home.

This is an example of what I'd call selective narrative, because on the one hand you chose to read "can" to mean it can get rid of an AMF (which it normally can't do), but on the other hand you don't want to read "can" to mean it can dismiss "instantaneous" spells (even as you acknowledge that the magic of the spell is still working). What's the distinction here? It appears to be nothing more than your own personal preference, not rule based.


Likewise for Imprisonment: Since there is technically no ongoing magic, Superb Dispelling would do nothing, unless the DM ruled that the suspended animation the subject is put in is identical to Temporal Stasis, in which case the stasis could be dispelled but not the physical imprisonment itself.
There is clearly ongoing magic. The subject is shielded from even being located, and even if you physically find them you can only free them with one singular spell. If they're just stuck in the ground you should be able to dig them out (once you locate them with wish), unless there is some magical reason preventing it, yet you can't. Again, this is an example of you choosing your own narrative for the rules. Why does the seed's (broad) description that it "can" defeat spells it normally couldn't not let it defeat Imprisonment? There is no logic to it being able to defeat the ongoing effect of an AMF that it normally couldn't, but not being able to defeat the ongoing effect of imprisonment that it normally couldn't, except your own personal preferences.


The Dragon cannot cast AMF and attack (whether one or six times) at all on the same turn, because casting AMF is a standard action, attacking is a standard or full action, and you only get one standard action per turn. You can move and cast a spell just fine; you just can't cast a spell, move, and then attack in the same turn.
At no point have I suggested the dragon casts and attacks in the same turn. Not once. I have suggested the dragon grapples and moves at the same time. My point is you are astoundingly claiming that the Dragon can't move and grapple, but that Xykon can move and attack on the same turn! Not one of the scenario's I wrote involves the dragon casting the AMF and having a single other action that turn. Please, TRY to read what I am writing here.


The dragon cannot "cover the same distance before Xykon casts" unless she readies an action to do so, something she could not do if she had cast AMF the round before. Each person's turn is their own turn; if Xykon moves 5 feet and then casts a spell on his turn, the ABD's superior move speed does not mean that she can immediately act on his turn. If the ABD's turn is "Standard: cast AMF. Move: Move next to Xykon." then Xykon's turn will simply be "Move: Move out of the bounds of the AMF. Standard: Cast (insert spell here)." He might provoke attacks of opportunity depending on how and where he moves; this is the only way the ABD could act on his turn.
The Dragon has the field on from the previous turn in every one of those instances. Again, you're not reading what I've written.


A) Um .. what has Xykon lost up to 66% of his hit points from? Where did you even get that number from?
Estimates I've seen for Xykon's HP's come in at around 180-ish. Superb Dispelling twice takes a max of 120 hit points. Hence the "up to".


B) Again, yes. If Superb Dispelling fails and the Dragon gets a grapple on him inside an AMF, then the fight is over. (Not that Xykon will actually die, but he'd lose.)
Which means if the Dragon goes first, Xykon has nothing to do but run away the moment he sees the Dragon cast AMF (and if he does anything else with that action, he's dead). I also think the Dragon has plenty of ways to kill Xykon's slow regeneration with prep, like the oracle she visits, etc.


Greater Invisibility, Greater Teleport to a spot ahead of her, Energy Drain. Rinse and repeat.
If the Dragon is fleeing (if) she will use a spell like invisibility herself on the first chance she gets, and if Xykon takes the breathing room to cast 2 spells, she will be invisible already. Please remember that teleport does not work like that (eg "I want to teleport in front of something I can't see somewhere"), Xykon will have lost sight of the Dragon pretty quickly, she flies at 200 feet per turn (double if hustling I believe), and she will be invisible by the time he teleports there if he is going to give her that kind of breathing room.


Alternately, after one or two Energy Drains, simply Finger of Death her; her saves will be in the gutter by that point and she's likely to fail.
Energy drain is not as effective as you think, especially on Dragons. Even after a maximized energy drain or two, the Dragon will be in great shape still (except as a caster).


I will not grant that the ABD can Plane Shift, though, because we have no evidence that she can at that moment in time.
Well we haven't seen Redcloak use the ritual, but obviously he can because it's integral to the story. Ditto the plane shift... if it's a scroll or whatever, fine, but clearly she has a way to plane shift, because she expected to be gone from this plane before V could do anything at all (which included summoning help who could teleport).

[pendell]

I'm curious.

The newly-reopened class and level geekery thread has just been opened, and it has stats for both Xykon and Mama dragon, yes? Or it will soon enough?

Is there such a thing as a D&D simulator? Some sort of computer simulation which will "fight" the combatants with a plausible AI?

If there is, we can drop in Xykon and ABD, then run it for , say, 1000 fights. Then we count up how many Xykon won, how many the ABD won, and how many were double-kills (which would be a Xykon win, since he can regenerate from a phylactery and Mamma can't).

I haven't gamed it myself, but it seems likely that either one could win if the dice were sufficiently skewed. The real question, to my mind, is which has the greater advantage. Whether the ABD can win if the dice are normal, instead of an improbable string of natural 20s for one combatant and 1s for the other.

As to whether Superb dispelling can defeat AMF -- what if it's cast from *outside* the AMF? V might have had a lot more trouble in hir fight if ze had been inside the AMF when it was turned on. But V cast disjunction from outside the AMF and ruined it utterly.

But if it's cast from inside -- given that we have two parties who are each convinced of their intrepretation of the rules, is there a neutral third party who can give a binding opinion? Because that seems to be the only way this will get resolved.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Once&FutureKing]

Even cast outside the AMF, SD shouldn't work either.

[Edric O]

Redcloak, if he starts out right next to Xykon and gets a surprise round. Which is pretty easy to set up.

:xykon: Hey Red-Eye, guess what? A bunch of humans are invading that blue city we left behind and killing everyone. Wanna watch it on TeeVo?
:redcloak: Heal. Quickened cure moderate wounds.
:xykon: *explodes*

[Math_Mage]

No, you don't get it, there's an 85% chance his Epic spells will work against the field... and those Epic spells are useless against the dragon, Cloister which doesn't hurt the dragon, epic mage armour (which just delays how long the Dragon takes to beat Xykon's skeleton to dust while grappled in an AMF) and Superb Dispelling (which will have an 85% chance of "casting normally" v.s the AMF, but will have a 0% chance of "dismissing the field" because it's description tells us it doesn't work on AMF's (Disjunction does though, and certain other spells continue to function in an AMF).

Its description tells us nothing of the sort. After all, its description tells us it was developed from the Dispel seed, which can function against all non-epic spells, even ones that are normally immune to dispel magic. That it omits to mention this below does not make it less true, only unmentioned.

[JSSheridan]

You know, if someone's not listening me and has already decided I'm wrong before even hearing what I say, I can go off find a more productive use for my time. The only way to win is not to play.

[Psyren]

Even cast outside the AMF, SD shouldn't work either.

You're free to decide that way at your table if you like, but that doesn't mean it follows the rules.

[Once&FutureKing]

"My" rules... meaning the actual spell as it is written, v.s your rules, which involves your subjective expansion of the spell based on your own selective reading of a Epic Spell rules in a way which does not necessarily lead to your conclusion at all.

[Math_Mage]

"My" rules... meaning the actual spell as it is written, v.s your rules, which involves your subjective expansion of the spell based on your own selective reading of a Epic Spell rules in a way which does not necessarily lead to your conclusion at all.

The actual spell, as it is written, is developed from the Dispel seed, which explicitly overrides non-epic immunity to dispels. (Notably, this doesn't mean you can S. Dispel instantaneous spells, as there's still nothing for S. Dispelling to act on.) The failure of the spell description text itself to note this override is careless, but not meaningful.

Since this is maybe the third time I've said the same thing, I'll stop posting about it until you actually respond to it.

[Morthis]

"My" rules... meaning the actual spell as it is written, v.s your rules, which involves your subjective expansion of the spell based on your own selective reading of a Epic Spell rules in a way which does not necessarily lead to your conclusion at all.

The actual spell does not exist. You cannot simply go and scribe superb dispelling, buy it at a store, or whatever else you want to call it. All epic spells must be developed, the epic spell rules are quite clear on this, do you disagree an epic spell must first be developed?

Then as for the development rules, they explain how you take a seed, apply various modifiers to it which increase or decrease the DC, and turn the end result into a spell. In case of superb dispelling, all the modifiers are listed, including the dispel seed. The dispel seed itself quite clearly states that it works on spells that are normally immune to dispel. The very process of making superb dispelling would mean having to include the dispel seed, and having a spell that can remove AMS.

The fact that you can make the exact same spell as superb dispelling, except one that works on AMS and other effects that normally aren't dispellable, should tell you enough. There is nothing more difficult about making your own spell vs using the examples, there's absolutely no reason to ever use the default superb dispelling if you can make the EXACT same spell but one that actually follows the dispel seed rules. It's quite clear this is simply an oversight because it's easier to say "Same as this spell" rather than putting all the dispel seed rules in there.


There is no reason to believe it's not the case, because you continue to believe the word "can" is the same as the word "will".

You realize, I hope, that the word can have multiple meanings depending on context? Below is the dispel seed quote.


The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic.

I would say, given the context, it's quite clear that "can" in this case means "is capable of". Why do I believe this? Well, because this is contrary to normal dispel, they essentially say "Unlike normal dispel, this dispel can remove those spells". The other interpretation of can is also extremely ambiguous because it completely fails to address which spells would not work, or what one might do to make the dispel seed work on those dispels. They typically don't leave spells that ambiguous unless the are open ended by default (like a non-standard wish).

Just to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to interpret can as anything but "is capable of" in a fairly normal context like this, let's look at another spell which uses "can" (and this I just found in like 1 minute, honestly there's tons of spell descriptions with the word can in it).

Wish:


A wish can produce any one of the following effects.

I'd say it's really quite clear, the word "can" is used, so it's no guarantee. Obviously the only way wish will work in this fashion is if the caster happens to have chocolate cake frosting on hand, because really, why would it work any other way?

[Yaminsoul]

Re: Edric

While I already have stated in this thread I believe RC COULD beat Xykon, even in a straight up fight, the heal/ quickened cure crit would not do so well.

First RC has to make 2 touch attacks, and we already know that Xykon has a decent touch ac from his fight with Darth V.

2nd Then he has to beat Xykon spell resistance, which is not easy.

3rd, Heal has a save if used offensively, as does Cure Crit, and its will save, a good one for Sorcerers.

4th, heal has max damage of 150 and cure crit would do about 35 damage on average, if RC is 17th level (my guess). Xykon probably has more Hp then that, if he is in the mid/high 20 levels, with some items.

So, all in all, not the best strat. Gating in Pit Fiends/ Epic level monsters on the other hand....

---------------

In terms of the Dragon debate...Yeah, unfortunately Epic levels spells a bit vague...But not going there....

[Da'Shain]

Again, response to Once&FutureKing spoilered for length.


There is no reason to believe it's not the case, because you continue to believe the word "can" is the same as the word "will". You are also pushing a made up narrative that all Epic Spells listed should always be assumed not to work as the description says, because they're "just examples", so when someone casts "vengeful gaze of god" I should apparently be unsurprising when they fire dire kittens at me. This is nonsensical.The word "can" does not mean the same thing as the word "will". However, if a spell has the ability to do something and this ability is not explicitly taken away, it will do that thing. On a successful dispel check, the dispel seed will, in the absence of specific exceptions to this new rule, always be able to defeat that spell.

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong on this and I don't see how I can explain it any more clearly. The dispel seed has the ability to defeat any spell regardless of whether it's vulnerable to non-epic magic or not. In the absence of some factor that actually removes this ability, any spell created from it also has that ability. Superb Dispelling is created from it; Superb Dispelling is a textbook epic spell that follows the rules precisely with no need for any ad hoc DM rulings; thus, Superb Dispelling retains that ability.



Either this is a throw away line intended to mislead other readers, or it's further evidence of you inventing your own narrative for the rules. The "rules" of the AMF interacting with Epic magic are whether said magic will CAST AT ALL, not whether the spells will do something they aren't described as having the ability to do!It's circumstantial evidence that supports epic magic's special role. Antimagic Field is reduced to a normal dispel check against epic magic; therefore, epic magic ignores AMF's normal immunities.


But it gets better ... You just gave the perfect example of how an Epic spell shouldn't always defeat a 6th level spell, because epic magic only has a chance of working against it, just like disjunction (a 9th level spell) has only a chance of working on an AMF, just like maximized/empowered disintegrate is a more damaging spell them Meteor Swarm, just like the lowly Black Tentacles spell is amazingly effective against higher level powers. This is terrible logic.There are spells of lower level that are arguably more powerful than spells of higher level, yes. That doesn't mean that the overwhelming trend isn't in the opposite direction. Epic magic has a far better chance of working against AMF than Disjunction does.


Emphasis added... it's kind of an important part, isn't it? Especially when the description for S.Dispelling is literally "just like Dispel Magic, but with a higher caster check (plus backlash damage)" (paraphrased).Superb Dispelling is not a continuation of the Dispel Magic line; it is a new spell made with a fundamental seed of magic. The fact that the writers chose to use a shorthand to describe it owes to it functioning similarly in virtually every respect, not that it is the same spell but more powerful.


Except of course for the description of Superb Dispelling, which gives the spell no such ability, and says it functions "just like" a spell which explicitly doesn't work on AMF, but "it has a higher caster check". In addition, using your logic for a moment here (and this will take a stiff drink), there's no logical reason to explain why S.Dispelling causes you backlash damage, that just seems unfair given what it does (and doesn't flow from the seed), but it doesn't matter, cos that's the spell description (NB- Xykon gets 3 additional injuries from using it too).Wow.


there's no logical reason to explain why S.Dispelling causes you backlash damage, that just seems unfair given what it does (and doesn't flow from the seed)Alrighty then. You don't understand how epic magic is created, despite the relevant rules being linked to multiple times. I suspected this before, but this out and out proves it.

There is a perfectly logical reason to explain the backlash damage. It's given on the entry fo the spell itself. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/superbDispelling.htm) It's a mitigating factor that lowers the spellcraft DC and makes the spell easier to cast.


Well, according to your own personal made up rules. Not according to the actual rules of the spell.We've just established that you don't understand the actual rules of the spell. So I'm going to ignore remarks like these from now on.


Dude, every spell can be developed (including Durkon's homebrew Death Ward).How? What mechanics are there for this? What seeds, factors, mitigations, or other system exists in the core rules for developing non-epic spells?


That doesn't mean that the text book spells given to us should be ignored. If this was a homebrew version, then sure, you've got an argument. But if there's no evidence it's homebrew (ala Death Ward or Forcecage) then the assumption is it isn't, and no matter how many times you repeat "epic spells are different" it won't matter, because it's a narrative you made up (that all Epic spells listed are just "examples" and people can who use them must be using their own personal version that can't function in the same way, just because you don't want it to).Really, if you can't argue without strawmanning the opposition, exaggerations are going to be your only arguments. I never said that epic spells characters use CANNOT function in the same way as is listed; I merely said that all epic spells are personally developed, and provided a link demonstrating this fact. Superb Dispelling is poorly written, because if the person who wrote it up had actually followed the epic spellcasting rules it is an example of, they would have mentioned this key difference from the "Dispel Magic" line.


This is an example of what I'd call selective narrative, because on the one hand you chose to read "can" to mean it can get rid of an AMF (which it normally can't do), but on the other hand you don't want to read "can" to mean it can dismiss "instantaneous" spells (even as you acknowledge that the magic of the spell is still working). What's the distinction here? It appears to be nothing more than your own personal preference, not rule based.... where did I acknowledge that the magic of the spell is still working? I stated specific aspects of it that Superb Dispelling would most likely be able to dispel, and others that it wouldn't. It's a complex spell, and would require DM involvement.


There is clearly ongoing magic. The subject is shielded from even being located, and even if you physically find them you can only free them with one singular spell. If they're just stuck in the ground you should be able to dig them out (once you locate them with wish), unless there is some magical reason preventing it, yet you can't. Again, this is an example of you choosing your own narrative for the rules. Why does the seed's (broad) description that it "can" defeat spells it normally couldn't not let it defeat Imprisonment? There is no logic to it being able to defeat the ongoing effect of an AMF that it normally couldn't, but not being able to defeat the ongoing effect of imprisonment that it normally couldn't, except your own personal preferences.Again. I said that parts of the spell involve ongoing magic, and parts do not. As a hard and fast rule, instantaneous magic cannot be dispelled. We have DMs for cases like this, where the effect is instantaneous but there's clearly still magic going on in some fashion.


At no point have I suggested the dragon casts and attacks in the same turn. Not once. I have suggested the dragon grapples and moves at the same time. My point is you are astoundingly claiming that the Dragon can't move and grapple, but that Xykon can move and attack on the same turn! Not one of the scenario's I wrote involves the dragon casting the AMF and having a single other action that turn. Please, TRY to read what I am writing here.Nowhere do I make the claim that the ABD can't move and grapple on the same turn. I make the claim that she can't move, grapple AND cast AMF on the same turn.


The Dragon has the field on from the previous turn in every one of those instances. Again, you're not reading what I've written.


B) If it fails, Dragon moves to Xykon's position and grapples him. Fight is over for xykon.This is what I was proceeding from, which upon rereading, you're correct, I'm sorry. But you're correct because I assumed you knew how this would work. If the dragon grapples Xykon WITHOUT an AMF up, the fight is over FOR HER. Xykon can Still every single one of his spells. We have no evidence that the ABD can, hence she cannot cast her AMF while in the grapple. Hence she gets level drained over and over while doing minimal damage to him because she can only attack him once each turn.


Estimates I've seen for Xykon's HP's come in at around 180-ish. Superb Dispelling twice takes a max of 120 hit points. Hence the "up to".Ah. So still proceeding from the assumption of backlash damage. Good to know.



Which means if the Dragon goes first, Xykon has nothing to do but run away the moment he sees the Dragon cast AMF (and if he does anything else with that action, he's dead). I also think the Dragon has plenty of ways to kill Xykon's slow regeneration with prep, like the oracle she visits, etc.Pretty much. Teleport away, scry on the dragon, pop back in when the AMF goes down then level drain her.

Given prep time, of course either one could completely surprise and overwhelm the other.


If the Dragon is fleeing (if) she will use a spell like invisibility herself on the first chance she gets, and if Xykon takes the breathing room to cast 2 spells, she will be invisible already. Please remember that teleport does not work like that (eg "I want to teleport in front of something I can't see somewhere"), Xykon will have lost sight of the Dragon pretty quickly, she flies at 200 feet per turn (double if hustling I believe), and she will be invisible by the time he teleports there if he is going to give her that kind of breathing room.I admitted that she had a good chance of escaping. However, Greater Teleport absolutely does work like that; if she's not zigging and zagging, Xykon can predict how fast she's moving and appear in her path for her to run across in a turn or so.


Energy drain is not as effective as you think, especially on Dragons. Even after a maximized energy drain or two, the Dragon will be in great shape still (except as a caster).Each negative level gives a -1 to saves. She would start with a +23 or +24 to her Fort save. Max Energy Drain, she has a +15 or 16. The minimum saving throw for Xykon's Finger of Death is 10+7+9=26, meaning she has a 50/50 or greater chance of failing.


Well we haven't seen Redcloak use the ritual, but obviously he can because it's integral to the story. Ditto the plane shift... if it's a scroll or whatever, fine, but clearly she has a way to plane shift, because she expected to be gone from this plane before V could do anything at all (which included summoning help who could teleport).She can Teleport. Thus she can Teleport to any naturally occurring gates she knows of or to any allies/prisoners she has which are capable of planeshifting her.

The fact that she has some means to leave the material plane is integral to the story. Her being able to do so under her own power is not. Even her having a scroll of it is not.

[Chronos]

Redcloak could get around the touch attack of Heal by using Mass Heal, instead. This also has the added benefit that he could target himself, as well, to erase any damage Xykon might have already done to him. And he could easily overcome Xykon's spell resistance, too, by virtue of liches not actually having spell resistance.

Disintegrate should also work well: The touch attack is pretty easy, and undead have terrible Fort saves. This is usually compensated for by the fact that they're immune to almost everything that allows a Fort save, but not to Disintegrate.

Really, though, the key in a Redcloak/Xykon duel is that Redcloak knows what all of Xykon's attacks are, and has spells available to neutralize all of them. Yes, Xykon could dispel those spells, but in a duel between high-level casters, every round counts.

Assuming that Redcloak has his buffs up ahead of time, but that Xykon somehow gets the first attack:
Round 1: Xykon uses Superb Dispelling on Redcloak
If Redcloak's Death Ward is taken down, he re-casts it, otherwise he attacks
Round 2: Xykon decides not to trade epic spell slots for low-level ones, and casts Meteor Swarm (Redcloak's fire-protection spell is probably down too, after all)
Redcloak is pretty hurt but almost certainly survives, and casts Mass Heal on both of them. He's back up to full, and Xykon is now hurt more.

And so on. Anything Xykon does, Redcloak can respond to.

[Vodnuth]

First the phylactery has to be destroyed or disabled. By disabled I mean shove it down some big animal's throat as they said in the first panel here http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0662.html . By doing this they can then destroy Xykon by whatever works and then he is pretty screwed. Oh and they have to kill the animal so that it doesn't pass the phylactery. Another altenative is to put the phylactery in a tiny box and dump that box in magma. Chucking it into the rift would also work but hopefully the bird won't be distracted this time.

[Kumori]

we now know that Redcloak is exactly 17th level

I'm guessing I missed something. I'll admit to not having paid that close of attention to the game-related details, but how do we know this?

[SaintRidley]

I'm guessing I missed something. I'll admit to not having paid that close of attention to the game-related details, but how do we know this?

He just recently got access to 9th level spells, which happens at level 17 for clerics.

[Math_Mage]

I'm guessing I missed something. I'll admit to not having paid that close of attention to the game-related details, but how do we know this?

17th level is when a cleric first learns 9th-level spells, such as Implosion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0826.html)

Bah, CoDZilla'd.

[Morthis]

Assuming that Redcloak has his buffs up ahead of time, but that Xykon somehow gets the first attack:
Round 1: Xykon uses Superb Dispelling on Redcloak
If Redcloak's Death Ward is taken down, he re-casts it, otherwise he attacks
Round 2: Xykon decides not to trade epic spell slots for low-level ones, and casts Meteor Swarm (Redcloak's fire-protection spell is probably down too, after all)

Considering how counter spell appears to work in oots, if Xykon took this fight seriously, he could easily counter spell every single death ward attempt by Redcloak. He can trade spell slots all day since he has a ton more.


Redcloak is pretty hurt but almost certainly survives, and casts Mass Heal on both of them. He's back up to full, and Xykon is now hurt more.

And so on. Anything Xykon does, Redcloak can respond to.

There's not much of an "and so on" to it though, Redcloak can likely only mass heal once, twice at most if his wisdom is high enough. I highly doubt he has healing as his domain to be able to pick mass heal for his domain slot.

[Kumori]

He just recently got access to 9th level spells, which happens at level 17 for clerics.


17th level is when a cleric first learns 9th-level spells, such as Implosion. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0826.html)

Bah, CoDZilla'd.

Ah, I had forgotten missed that. Thanks.

[Once&FutureKing]

The actual spell, as it is written, is developed from the Dispel seed, which explicitly overrides non-epic immunity to dispels. (Notably, this doesn't mean you can S. Dispel instantaneous spells, as there's still nothing for S. Dispelling to act on.) The failure of the spell description text itself to note this override is careless, but not meaningful.

Since this is maybe the third time I've said the same thing, I'll stop posting about it until you actually respond to it.

For what is maybe the 4th time now, I'll repeat my response, which you continue to flat out ignore. The Dispel Seed does not say that it always overrides non-epic spells which it would otherwise be unable to override. It says it CAN override them, but not that it "will", or "always shall", override them.

This is a key distinction you seem unwilling to grasp. Epic spells using the Dispel Seed CAN do these things, but they don't necessarily always do them (or don't necessarily always do all of them), and there may be costs to such a spell we know nothing about (like other Epic spells have costs). In the case of Superb dispelling there is no mention of it having this ability, and in addition it is described as merely being Greater Dispel Magic with a much higher caster check (and backlash damage as the cost of using it).

Given there is no mention or hint of Superb Dispel being able to override an AMF, and given the wording of the Epic Seed in question (that it "can" do it, but not that it always will in every one of those cases), there is no logical reason for us to infer it. None. It's pure speculation on your part, and speculation that goes beyond the actual spell, and invents further attributes for it which the reading of the text doesn't have to support at all.


The actual spell does not exist. You cannot simply go and scribe superb dispelling, buy it at a store, or whatever else you want to call it. All epic spells must be developed, the epic spell rules are quite clear on this, do you disagree an epic spell must first be developed?

The fact something cannot be purchased at a store or scribed does not mean it does not exist. If it does then you know what else doesn't exist? Every Cleric and Sorcerer spell ever... because they can't buy them and scribe them down.

For the conceptual purposes of the story, of course an epic spell must be developed, in the same way that a sorcerer is said to be like a poet, who creates his spells like a muse does words. However that in no way invalidates the list of normal (or epic) spells which can be learnt, and we know it doesn't because those epic spells, rather than being hypothetical examples, have distinct and prescriptive descriptions of how you can obtain that exact spell. Every DM ever would allow a player to obtain prescribed epic spells like Superb Dispelling, it's just most players find it more fun to invent their own... more power to them, but the idea that the Epic Spells painstakingly described in the handbooks "don't exist" is just a ridiculous response.


The fact that you can make the exact same spell as superb dispelling, except one that works on AMS and other effects that normally aren't dispellable, should tell you enough.
I don't agree with that claim at all. It's not at all clear you could do this, because while the seed CAN override such things, we don't know that the cost of developing such a spell wouldn't be higher. I'm not going to do said calculation/proposed-spell, but it's not necessarily true at all, and your passing it off as so is just dishonest.


The word "can" does not mean the same thing as the word "will". However, if a spell has the ability to do something and this ability is not explicitly taken away,
This is the exact opposite of the burden of proof that is logically required in any forum of debate or reason. Ever. You've literally just asked me to prove a negative, because it's not enough for the spell to not have [power A], you're demanding that I prove it doesn't have [power A]. That's ridiculous, and the reason you've gotten to that point is because you're working from a false premise, namely that Superb Dispelling (or the Dispel seed) always has this ability in the first place. It doesn't, and nowhere does it say it does, only that the seed on which it was based CAN do said thing.

The amazing and ironic thing is that you guys have invoked the spell Wish as an example in your favor, when it's the perfect argument against you. Wish is described as being able to do certain things, but that doesn't mean it will do all of them (or any of them really), because the word "can" doesn't mean what you want it to.

I gave you a good example of how your own reading of the spell was laced with personal subjectivity, and I fear the irony was lost. If I were to read the spell as widely as you have (that it will always negate things dispel magic normally doesn't have the capability to negate), then why would I stop at Superb Dispel being able to negate AMF's? Why wouldn't it also be able to negate (supposedly) "instantaneous" spells (which in fact have magical effects that persist after they are "instantly" cast (imprisonment and gate being 2 great examples). I never got a satisfactory response. Would it follow that superb dispelling could negate one of those "god spells" that transforms the user into a god? After all, that also is something dispel can't normally do, so why are we stopping at AMF's? These were serious logical questions that were posed to you, and you just ignored them because they didn't suit your desired outcome.

The rest of what the above poster wrote isn't really worth a reply, it's mostly generalities, claims "strawmanning" (really?), misunderstanding what I said about backlash damage, and generally avoiding the difficult questions posed in favour of general statements that I "don't know anything". Awesome reply.

[Once&FutureKing]

I tried to read the thread a little bit.
Even IF you can't superb dispel an AMF (and in which case I think it'd be overpowered), then as far as I understood, depending on Xykon, there's at least a 80-90% chance of each epic spell actually working.

I'm not too familiar with the game rules, but I find it incredibly unlikely that the black dragon will triumph with an AMF doing nothing but granting 10-20% chance of the first few incomming spells not working.

Edit: Come to think about it. Should the ABD not have used AMF after it ate Darth V, or does shapechange bypass an AMF?

Wouldn't have worked, because V while spliced was shackled to Wizards MUCH stronger than Xykon who (at least in the cases of Haerta and Ganonron) would be totally unhindered by an AMF. Haerta can cast disjunction and shred it (and by extension V could), and the fiends description of her being able to "kill with a thought" is basically a flat out statement she has momento mori (an Epic necromancy spell that could have one shot the Black Dragon if V wasn't playing around with her). Worst case, V could Epic Teleport out of there. Also, under D&D rules being in a Dragon's stomach isn't insta-fatal, just as being swallowed isn't. You lose points per round you're in there, but V isn't dead fast enough (especially with all those buffs) for it to matter.

Xykon on the other hand has a bunch of Epic spells that don't really help in that situation.

[Ancalagon]

Wouldn't have worked, because V while spliced was shackled to Wizards MUCH stronger than Xykon who (at least in the cases of Haerta and Ganonron)

Citation please. For all we know, Xykon could be stronger than all three of them individually. Actually, I find it likely to assume he is in his end 20s and some of the other casters might be in their early 20s. And actually, if you lose your epic spellslots after one maximised energy drain you very likely are of a lower level than a person who can cast a maximised energy drain.

[Once&FutureKing]

Notice I specifically excluded Jephton (the only one to lose his Epic Spells as far as we know). I've got no idea how strong Jephton was.

However for the Oracle to be correct, they'd have to be stronger than any caster who ever lived by a substantial margin, and Xykon once lived (and has been comparably powered to other casters who once lived).

But just looking at some of the abilities they showed, it is logically keeping with that claim, as things like Epic Teleport and Familicide are by far and away more powerful than anything we've seen Xykon do.

[Ancalagon]

Notice I specifically excluded Jephton (the only one to lose his Epic Spells as far as we know). I've got no idea how strong Jephton was.

If you are making a case and bluntly dismiss 33% of your data points your argument becomes very weak.


However for the Oracle to be correct,

What oracle do you refer to here?


they'd have to be stronger than any caster who ever lived by a substantial margin, and Xykon once lived (and has been comparably powered to other casters who once lived).

No, they do not say that. First, they say they bind the souls of the most powerful evil casters they command to Vaarsuvius.
They do not (yet) have access Xykon's soul, so we have no idea where he stands in relation to those three. It could very well be he take away the crown (he'd like that) in the CE afterlife once his souls shuffles down there.
Xykon is dead, yes. But he is not really dead as his soul has not yet entered the afterlife but still hangs out on the mortal plane.


But just looking at some of the abilities they showed, it is logically keeping with that claim, as things like Epic Teleport and Familicide are by far and away more powerful than anything we've seen Xykon do.

Actually, a) I doubt the rules apply 1:1 here and b) we have Xykon seen doing some impressive epic magic. For example using a 12th level spell slot and we know he has access to at least three epic spells.
Given Rich's slacking in regard to explicitly following the rules, neither of the three and Xykon have shown to be much more powerful or much weaker than the others.
You simply cannot state the souls are more powerful than Xykon but to lose an epic slot due to an energy drain (8 levels) that caster must be level 28 or lower OR, in case each of the two souls ate half of the drain level 24 or lower. The fact (yes, I think it is a fact) Xykon is in his end 20s makes it likely (7/8) at least one of them is weaker than him.

[Once&FutureKing]

Oh please, don't act like I championed Jephton, when I specifically excluded him (though he may well be more powerful).

The Fiends promised that V's power would dwarf any magic user who had ever lived in the history of the multiverse. Xykon doesn't live anymore, but plenty of casters have lived who are of comparable power (Dorukan for instance, who may have been handed an idiot ball in their fight, but who otherwise should have won, and was an extremely high level Wizard... I think I saw a calc in the old Class Geekery thread that had him over level 30... and either way, Xykon didn't "dwarf" Dorukan by any means, so by logical extension he can't be stronger than guys who do).

But more importantly, just look at what these guys did. One was an inter-dimensional conqueror who conquered "world after world". Xykon is basically a one city villain (one country or two tops). Against the resources of Tarquin (for instance) he's dead, and before you make light please remember that this is the guy who casually sends an army of DRAGONS to invade another country. If an army of Dragons attacks Xykon, he's dead. So far a number of different things have trumped Xykon so far (or been hinted to). I have not seen any hint Xykon was on the pay scale of world conqueror, let alone "forged multi-dimensional empire".

No spell or magic Xykon has shown has even sniffed the sort of level you'd need to be to create spells like Familicide or Epic Teleport. I remember googling some calculations for them, and they looked insane. To just throw out the rule book isn't a good way to reach a logical conclusion. Even the use of disjunction suggests an amazingly high level (since to be confident it would work you'd need to be way, way above level 27-35).

[Gift Jeraff]

I think you misread "dragoons" as "dragons." :smalltongue:

[Ancalagon]

Oh please, don't act like I championed Jephton, when I specifically excluded him (though he may well be more powerful).

Oh, you start dragging the tone down? Now, that makes me motivated to go on discussing with you.
As for the facts: I never said you championed that specific character. I only said you dismissing 33% of your datapoints (1 of 3) makes your argument really crappy. Especially as that datapoint is pretty important. If all you can say about this is "I dismiss him because he does not really support what I want to argue for" you must not be surprised if I consider that a pretty weak case.


The Fiends promised that V's power would dwarf any magic user who had ever lived in the history of the multiverse. Xykon doesn't live anymore, but plenty of casters have lived who are of comparable power (Dorukan for instance, who may have been handed an idiot ball in their fight, but who otherwise should have won, and was an extremely high level Wizard... I think I saw a calc in the old Class Geekery thread that had him over level 30... and either way, Xykon didn't "dwarf" Dorukan by any means, so by logical extension he can't be stronger than guys who do).

Read it again. They said the combination of the four souls would dwarf anyone.
Plus: they totally expected Vaarsuvius to loose in a fight with Xykon from the very start. They said that later (they wanted the Lich roughed off, not defeated).
So there's not much left in regard to reliability to what the fiends there said.


But more importantly, just look at what these guys did. One was an inter-dimensional conqueror who conquered "world after world".

As I said, Rich very probably ignores the rules in regard to epic magic. His statements here have been very clear so we cannot base a true estimation on that. Epic Magic in OotS means: "Awesome stuff and what drives the plot goes".


Xykon is basically a one city villain (one country or two tops). Against the resources of Tarquin (for instance) he's dead, and before you make light please remember that this is the guy who casually sends an army of DRAGONS to invade another country.

We have no idea what Xykon could and would do should he have a different plan.


If an army of Dragons attacks Xykon, he's dead.

Man, it's Dragoons. Dragoons. Google and wikipedia it up before going on. Please, do me and especially yourself that favour before we proceed.

But even if it were dragons, Xykon could still teleport out.

Also, how you estimate Tarquin would be able to equally fight Xykon based on his abilities to send armies is a tad shacky.


So far a number of different things have trumped Xykon so far (or been hinted to). I have not seen any hint Xykon was on the pay scale of world conqueror, let alone "forged multi-dimensional empire".

You mean that he is on a quest that threatens the multiverse and gods themselves or the fact that he has squished a few epic level challenges and only lost the one against Soon due to his own carelessness is no hint at all?


No spell or magic Xykon has shown has even sniffed the sort of level you'd need to be to create spells like Familicide or Epic Teleport. I remember googling some calculations for them, and they looked insane. To just throw out the rule book isn't a good way to reach a logical conclusion. Even the use of disjunction suggests an amazingly high level (since to be confident it would work you'd need to be way, way above level 27-35).

Again: Rich blatantly ignores the rules here and as such we cannot really base estimates on epic magic we saw. And I looked it up: the first of your "supermegacasters" even lost his epic spell slots after the first normal Energy Drain. That puts "one of the most powerful evil casters ever lived" at level 28 at max (and I think it's probably his max is only Energy Drain / 2 as max, thus 24). We really are not talking levels 40+ here, then and as such we are very well in the region of Xykon's level.

Summary:
* Dragoons.
* The epic spells we saw cannot be used as rule-vise estimatate of powerlevels.

[Morthis]

For what is maybe the 4th time now, I'll repeat my response, which you continue to flat out ignore. The Dispel Seed does not say that it always overrides non-epic spells which it would otherwise be unable to override. It says it CAN override them, but not that it "will", or "always shall", override them.

No, it's really just your unwillingness to understand "can" can have multiple meanings depending on context.

If your friend asks you if you could pick him up from the airport tomorrow, and you reply "I can do that", he will interpret it to mean that you'll be there, not that you're stating you are capable of driving to the airport, but have no intention of actually doing so. The second interpretation of "I can do that" in this case is utterly ridiculous unless it's some weird prank. What I feel like you're doing is arguing that the second interpretation is actually the only way this sentence can be interpreted at all.

I would like to know, then, in your interpretation of this. Could you tell me which spells the dispel seed works on that dispel magic does not? What might the cost be for it to work on other spells? They don't normally leave stuff like this so ambiguous, so I feel that either your interpretation is wrong, or I'm not finding some important information regarding this. If you could supply that information, I think your interpretation would hold a lot more weight.


I don't agree with that claim at all. It's not at all clear you could do this, because while the seed CAN override such things, we don't know that the cost of developing such a spell wouldn't be higher. I'm not going to do said calculation/proposed-spell, but it's not necessarily true at all, and your passing it off as so is just dishonest.

What's dishonest is your unwillingness to even acknowledge the word "can" has multiple meanings. It's stubborn taken to such a ridiculous level I feel like you'd claim Xykon's robe is pink if that somehow furthered your argument.

The epic rules are rather detailed for the most part (ad hoc and combining seeds leaves room for interpretation though). There is no reason is no good reason to believe the dispel seed rules are so obtuse when the alternative explanation is simply that the word "can" means "is capable of".


The amazing and ironic thing is that you guys have invoked the spell Wish as an example in your favor, when it's the perfect argument against you. Wish is described as being able to do certain things, but that doesn't mean it will do all of them (or any of them really), because the word "can" doesn't mean what you want it to.

Oh please, Wish was one example. Here, let me do this another way. This is part of the description of AMF.


A normal creature can enter the area, as can normal missiles.

Since the word can is used, we have no reason to believe that the spell is actually capable of this. Since allowing AMF to envelop other people would make it far more powerful than normal (I mean where does it stop? Does it stop gods too?!) I feel the only way to interpret this is to say that nobody else can enter the AMF field, so Xykon would be perfectly safe outside and the field would just push him away when it comes close.

[Cronos988]

For what is maybe the 4th time now, I'll repeat my response, which you continue to flat out ignore. The Dispel Seed does not say that it always overrides non-epic spells which it would otherwise be unable to override. It says it CAN override them, but not that it "will", or "always shall", override them.

This is a key distinction you seem unwilling to grasp. Epic spells using the Dispel Seed CAN do these things, but they don't necessarily always do them (or don't necessarily always do all of them), and there may be costs to such a spell we know nothing about (like other Epic spells have costs). In the case of Superb dispelling there is no mention of it having this ability, and in addition it is described as merely being Greater Dispel Magic with a much higher caster check (and backlash damage as the cost of using it).

Given there is no mention or hint of Superb Dispel being able to override an AMF, and given the wording of the Epic Seed in question (that it "can" do it, but not that it always will in every one of those cases), there is no logical reason for us to infer it. None. It's pure speculation on your part, and speculation that goes beyond the actual spell, and invents further attributes for it which the reading of the text doesn't have to support at all.


The problem with that argument is that there is no epic spell modifier to do what you claim needs to be done: To specifically give the dispel seed the ability to affect spells dispel magic cannot affect. So either your logic is wrong, and it really means "is capable of", or the wording of the seed makes no sense.



The fact something cannot be purchased at a store or scribed does not mean it does not exist. If it does then you know what else doesn't exist? Every Cleric and Sorcerer spell ever... because they can't buy them and scribe them down.

For the conceptual purposes of the story, of course an epic spell must be developed, in the same way that a sorcerer is said to be like a poet, who creates his spells like a muse does words. However that in no way invalidates the list of normal (or epic) spells which can be learnt, and we know it doesn't because those epic spells, rather than being hypothetical examples, have distinct and prescriptive descriptions of how you can obtain that exact spell. Every DM ever would allow a player to obtain prescribed epic spells like Superb Dispelling, it's just most players find it more fun to invent their own... more power to them, but the idea that the Epic Spells painstakingly described in the handbooks "don't exist" is just a ridiculous response.


You are wrong on this, I am afraid. The examples do not exist unless someone creates them. That is why they include all the modifiers you have to use to create them. They are blueprints, not existing spells.

They "exist" the same way a car exists once there is a blueprint of it: If you want a car, you can make one from the blueprints, but the car is not the same as the blueprint. However, it is very likely that when Rich calls a spell superb dispelling, it is actually the superb dispelling from the SRD, though there is not a terrible lot of evidence for it doing as much as 10d6 backlash damage (which is quite massive).

On topic though, it still seems hard for Xykon to actually defeat the dragon if they trade AMF for spells, at least so long as the Black Dragon is smart enough to cast AMF before the fight or in her first round. He can run away, yes, but as long as he cannot cast a maximized energy drain first thing in the battle, the battle will end in a tie.

That is unless Xykon has greater dispel magic to counterspell AMF. In that case, Xykon can counter every AMF, or can you only counterspell hostile spells directed at you?

Since Xykon can constantly teleport away and cast long range spells, it seems unlikely an AMF-less Dragon can beat him in an open environment. Now if they are confined, then a Dragon can still do a whole lot of damage.

In Fact, in a confined environment, Xykons 180 HP wont save him a whole lot from anything with good melee damage, provided it gets through his DR.

[Math_Mage]

For what is maybe the 4th time now, I'll repeat my response, which you continue to flat out ignore. The Dispel Seed does not say that it always overrides non-epic spells which it would otherwise be unable to override. It says it CAN override them, but not that it "will", or "always shall", override them.

Well, it would certainly be wrong to say that it "will" or "always shall" override them, given that the result is still subject to an opposed Dispel check. But 'can' unambiguously means that you can always cast Superb Dispelling (or any other spell prepared from the Dispel seed) as a way to defeat those spells. There is no way to develop an epic spell from the Dispel seed that doesn't have that capability.

There is already a way for RAW to identify an optional addendum to a seed (that is, a capability that is not used by every spell developed from that seed). That is by using the word 'may', as here:


Seed: Afflict
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Fear, Mind-Affecting]
Spellcraft DC: 14
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 300 ft.
Target: One living creature
Duration: 20 minutes
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes


Afflicts the target with a -2 morale penalty on attack rolls, checks, and saving throws. For each additional -1 penalty assessed on either the target’s attack rolls, checks, or saving throws, increase the Spellcraft DC by +2. A character may also develop a spell with this seed that afflicts the target with a -1 penalty on caster level checks, a -1 penalty to an ability score, a -1 penalty to spell resistance, or a -1 penalty to some other aspect of the target. For each additional -1 penalty assessed in one of the above categories, increase the Spell-craft DC by +4. This seed can afflict a character’s ability scores to the point where they reach 0, except for Constitution where 1 is the minimum. If a factor is applied to increase the duration of this seed, ability score penalties instead become temporary ability damage. If a factor is applied to make the duration permanent, any ability score penalties become permanent ability drain. Finally, by increasing the Spellcraft DC by +2, one of the target’s senses can be afflicted: sight, smell, hearing, taste, touch, or a special sense the target possesses. If the target fails its saving throw, the sense selected doesn’t function for the spell’s duration, with all attendant penalties that apply for losing the specified sense.

This is obviously different from...


The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic.
...which plainly applies to every spell developed from that seed.

Are we done yet?

[Chronos]

Quoth Morthis:
There's not much of an "and so on" to it though, Redcloak can likely only mass heal once, twice at most if his wisdom is high enough. I highly doubt he has healing as his domain to be able to pick mass heal for his domain slot.Yeah, Redcloak doesn't have the endurance to keep up for long. But fights between casters that high-level don't go long, anyway. By the end of it, he'd be battered, and he'd have used a lot of spell slots, but he'd have a good chance of winning.

Now, if Xykon caught him with his buffs down, that'd be a different story: Redcloak would be a messy green smear in that case. But Xykon can't afford to do that until he's got the Ritual done, and Reddy is sure to buff the day of the Ritual.

Quoth Once&FutureKing:
Haerta can cast disjunction and shred it (and by extension V could), and the fiends description of her being able to "kill with a thought" is basically a flat out statement she has momento mori (an Epic necromancy spell that could have one shot the Black Dragon if V wasn't playing around with her).Actually, all she needs to be able to "kill with a thought" is ninth-level spell slots and a couple of feats. Likewise for Ganonron's teleporting entire armies across planes. A still silent Finger of Death will work for the first, and a Gate will suffice for the second. People can really underestimate ninth-level spells.

[Ancalagon]

But Xykon can't afford to do that until he's got the Ritual done, and Reddy is sure to buff the day of the Ritual.

Careful. Xykon knows the knowledge he needs from his Divine Caster is tied to Goblin Clerics and the Red Cloak. He knows he does not need Redcloak. It is just a question of he wants to risk to subdue a new cleric to do what he wishes him to do.


People can really underestimate ninth-level spells.

Actually, many people do that :smallbiggrin:. And you can even create a lot more cool things with adding epic magic.
I bet some Gate + Low Epic Magic can pretty much do what we have seen in the comic (like a Gate opens the connection and some Epic Spell then is used to move the ships/armies through that gate, so technically, the ships would not have actually been "teleported". We move from a DC 500+ Spell to something that seems managable).
Throw in some other sort of Epic Teleport to get through the Cloister and we are pretty much at what the comic has shown.

Even without Rich ignoring the rules we can construct us means to explain what we saw within the rules and within the levels 20 to 30.

[Yaminsoul]

Re Chronos.

Sorry, my bad about spell resistance. Forgot Litch template does not give that...been a while.

Mass heal would avoid touch attack, but would still allow Xykon a good save. Disintegrate could work and targets a weak save, but I might guess Xykon has something prepared for that, and it seems like Xykon might the Hp to survive....

So while we don't know exactly what Xykon has, I think RC best option would involve gate and allies rather then 1 on 1 trading of spells. While usually high level spells fights are over quick, in this particular case I think the reinforcements would be useful.

And I agree about the Buffs, but RC seems enough of a tactician to always have them up, especially with the ring now...

[Fitzclowningham]

Actually, many people do that :smallbiggrin:. And you can even create a lot more cool things with adding epic magic.
I bet some Gate + Low Epic Magic can pretty much do what we have seen in the comic (like a Gate opens the connection and some Epic Spell then is used to move the ships/armies through that gate, so technically, the ships would not have actually been "teleported". We move from a DC 500+ Spell to something that seems managable).
Throw in some other sort of Epic Teleport to get through the Cloister and we are pretty much at what the comic has shown.

Even without Rich ignoring the rules we can construct us means to explain what we saw within the rules and within the levels 20 to 30.

You make a good point here - I'd always thought the Epic Teleport would be at least DC 100. Can you put together something that likewise lowers the difficulty for Familicide? Every time I think of that one I get dizzy. The spell (imvho) requires a) divination that finds out who all the direct relatives are and their locations, quite possibly on every inner plane and b) unlimited range death magic of such potency that it kills up to and including ancient dragons without a saving throw. Any way I try to put it together, it comes out way, way above Xykon's paygrade. Maybe I'm overlooking something?

[Once&FutureKing]

As for the facts: I never said you championed that specific character. I only said you dismissing 33% of your datapoints (1 of 3) makes your argument really crappy. Especially as that datapoint is pretty important. If all you can say about this is "I dismiss him because he does not really support what I want to argue for" you must not be surprised if I consider that a pretty weak case.

I can only assume you're confused. Here is how you sound; "you said Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen were transcendent basketball players... but you didn't say Horace Grant was, so that hurts 33% of your argument". Huh?

How on earth does my pointing out several casters way beyond Xykon's payscale someone lose value as an argument because a 3rd caster (who I did not say was necessarily well beyond him) might or might not be well beyond him? Utterly bizarre.


Read it again. They said the combination of the four souls would dwarf anyone.
That's not the exact wording, but sure, V loses a splice he's weaker. You know what else was said? That he would be unable to gain XP because he's so far beyond everyone, and (according to the Oracle) he would gain ultimate arcane power. There's nothing very ultimate about being weaker than Xykon. I really hope you're not pitching for a bizarre reading of "dwarf" to mean "he had a much bigger number of spells available", because I don't think that's even a remotely sensible reading in context (particularly not with all the other things we were told by the fiends/oracle, and the things we saw). Dwarf is pretty clear, he was much more powerful than any other caster who ever lived with the 3 splices (by a huge amount, hence dwarfing them).


Man, it's Dragoons. Dragoons.
Ok, this is a genuine reading error on my part. I still think it's pretty clear Tarquin has the resources the crush Xykon, but not as obviously as I thought.


You mean that he is on a quest that threatens the multiverse and gods themselves or the fact that he has squished a few epic level challenges and only lost the one against Soon due to his own carelessness is no hint at all?
A quest he couldn't have a hope of completing if not for a) Redcloak and his god helping, and b) some magical artifacts created by people that he himself could not create (not alone anyway).

As for Xykon's invincibility, the guy has looked disturbingly mortal. He lost to Roy, and he lost against Soon fair and square, not because of "carelessness". His 3 big epic fights have all been plot forced victories, where the other characters act stupid, get given the idiot ball, and lose. Dorukan especially, but also his victory against V and Lirian. Even a remotely sensible strategy from these guys would have left Xykon dead as a doornail. The guy lost to a silver dragon. He's not on the power scale you want him to be on. He's hugely impressive of course, level 27-35-ish is nothing to sneeze at, he's probably the most powerful arcane caster in the World right now. But that's a far cry from being the most powerful caster in the history of the multi-verse by a large margin, with "ultimate" arcane power (the biggest component of which was Haerta, who was more powerful than the others by a substantial margin).


And I looked it up: the first of your "supermegacasters" even lost his epic spell slots after the first normal Energy Drain.
So some caster who was not one of my examples of a caster who dwarfed Xykon was level 24-28 at most... um, ok. But he wasn't one of my arguments? :smallconfused:

Now, Morthis:

What's dishonest is your unwillingness to even acknowledge the word "can" has multiple meanings.
Sure, the word can has different contexts in which it will mean different things. It's your side who has insisted it means 1 thing, while I've merely insisted it's not clear enough for us to automatically grant it to a spell which explicitly makes no mention of said ability at all. I don't think it has to mean one thing, it's your side who thinks it does, and has to prove it accordingly. Which is why your "it's like the wording of wish" example was so terrible, because wish does not always do the things in it's spell description.

Chronos:

So either your logic is wrong, and it really means "is capable of"
Even if it did mean "is capable of", that doesn't help your side, because while the seed "is capable" of being used to do [X], that doesn't mean a spell created from it will [always do X], and it doesn't tell us what the cost of this hypothetical spell would be. We know the cost and abilities of superb dispelling, and it makes no mention of the ability you want it to have, and which only certain readings of the Seed it comes from would grant it.


You are wrong on this, I am afraid. The examples do not exist unless someone creates them. That is why they include all the modifiers you have to use to create them. They are blueprints, not existing spells.
Truly, the text you're replying to is my answer once again. You're just inventing a made up narrative. The spells do "exist", you can learn them, and you even concede Rich probably does mean the "example" spell of Superb Dispelling, so why don't you stop pursuing this line of argument. Thanks.


That is unless Xykon has greater dispel magic to counterspell AMF. In that case, Xykon can counter every AMF, or can you only counterspell hostile spells directed at you?
I wish people would read more carefully before they say things. The "Xykon would win" side wants Xykon to cast multiple spells per turn, and he can't. If Xykon uses his first round to cast Maximized Energy Drain, then he can't also use his first round to "counter spell" the AMF, because that will be up by the next round (Xykon just used his turn to cast MED!), and once it's up Greater Dispel (which we don't even know Xykon HAS) becomes useless! The moment the AMF is up (ignoring the ridiculous attempt to re-write superb dispelling that is going on), Xykon has to run. So if it's the first turn, and the Dragon goes first, Xykon literally has to run on the very first action (with teleport), or he will be grappled next turn (which assures his death in the AMF). If Xykon casts first, the Dragon's first move is AMF, in which case Xykon must run again (with teleport), or he'll immediately be grappled (assuring his death in the AMF). This is not a winning strategy by Xykon, it's fleeing at once, or dying (which remember, shows much more sense than we've seen Xykon show in battle thus far).

I struggle to imagine how Xykon can win (without granting him abilities he isn't shown to have), because he can't stop the AMF (even if he goes first), and then once it's up he's got no way to really hurt the Dragon. He also becomes an ordinary skeleton in the field who will be crushed to powder.


Gate will suffice for the second
Gate is an awesome spell. But what Ganonron did seems to go well beyond Gate (NB rule: "You may hold the gate open only for a brief time (no more than 1 round per caster level), and you must concentrate on doing so, or else the interplanar connection is severed."), and his possession of Epic Teleport tells us he wasn't just relying on 9th level spells for his conjuring specialty.


You make a good point here - I'd always thought the Epic Teleport would be at least DC 100. Can you put together something that likewise lowers the difficulty for Familicide?
I am no expert in Epic Magic, but I can't imagine something that does what Epic Teleport was shown to do has a DC that is even remotely within Xykon range. Do people understand how many people were on those boats V teleported (without permission) over a huge distance? Based on earlier numbers we were given, many, many thousands.

[Math_Mage]

Even if it did mean "is capable of", that doesn't help your side, because while the seed "is capable" of being used to do [X], that doesn't mean a spell created from it will [always do X], and it doesn't tell us what the cost of this hypothetical spell would be. We know the cost and abilities of superb dispelling, and it makes no mention of the ability you want it to have, and which only certain readings of the Seed it comes from would grant it.

The dispel seed "is capable of" defeating all non-epic spells --> any epic dispel developed from that seed has that capability. I mean, feel free to find any other examples of epic spells that you think don't follow this rule, if you can.


Truly, the text you're replying to is my answer once again. You're just inventing a made up narrative. The spells do "exist", you can learn them, and you even concede Rich probably does mean the "example" spell of Superb Dispelling, so why don't you stop pursuing this line of argument. Thanks.

Even in OOTSverse, epic spells are researched (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0532.html) (Cloister being just one of several). The fact that these example spells represent standard templates for epic spell development is yet another reason why the dispel seed's explicit override trumps the spell description's omission of the override.

Here's a bit more to support this point:


To Develop

The first part of this entry shows the resources in gold, time, and experience points a character must expend to develop the spell shown. If the character expends the resources, he or she develops the spell if he or she has access to all the seeds. Spells containing the life or heal seed are typically only available to those with 24 or more ranks in Knowledge (religion) or Knowledge (nature). The rest of the development entry details the seeds and factors used to create the epic spell. This information is provided as an example for characters when they attempt to create and develop their own unique epic spells.

IOW, even though the spell is listed in the sourcebook, the character still has to develop it.


I wish people would read more carefully before they say things.

Indeed. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/announcement.php?a=1)

[Once&FutureKing]

I am "capable of" killing a frost giant. It doesn't mean I will, or that I realistically can. A spell developed from that seed has the capacity to do X, but it doesn't mean the final product will do it, and looking at the final product of Superb Dispelling, it doesn't (unless we imagine it to have properties it need not have).

I also find this "it must be researched" distinction to be an unhelpful analogy. I mean, Sorcerer's can't technically "research" anything, they learn Magic "as a poet imagines words" (paraphrased), doing it all on instinct and imagination. Every single spell a sorcerer learns is essentially obtained that way, be it Epic or non-Epic. Xykon didn't read about cloister in a book and write it down in his spell book, for all we know he just looked at the headband and said "huh, I just thought up a great rhyme/spell!" (insert picture of Killer Bee). So while sometimes the text might refer to a sorcerer "researching" something, it doesn't really mean what it sounds like.

When Xykon "imagined" the fireball spell, he (might well) have no idea it existed in a book somewhere and was used by annoying wizards, as far as he's concerned it's original, and the same applies for Epic Spells, which he is able to learn in the same way as others. Exactly who first "invented" the spell is moot for the purposes of the game.

[Morthis]

Sure, the word can has different contexts in which it will mean different things. It's your side who has insisted it means 1 thing, while I've merely insisted it's not clear enough for us to automatically grant it to a spell which explicitly makes no mention of said ability at all. I don't think it has to mean one thing, it's your side who thinks it does, and has to prove it accordingly. Which is why your "it's like the wording of wish" example was so terrible, because wish does not always do the things in it's spell description.

I already mentioned another example with AMF. The word can is used in virtually every single spell. With the same logic you're applying to the dispel seed, true resurrection is actually no better than raise dead, because everything it is capable of doing beyond raise dead is preceded by can. Implosion only hits one target, because the extra target each round is preceded by can. The entire dominate line of spells uses the word can, guess they don't do anything. Really, I could list at least half the spells on srd, and all of them will use the word can, so I guess everybody on the planet has been playing the game wrong all along.

It's up to you to provide an argument as to why the word "can" in the dispel seed has a different meaning than the word "can" in virtually every other spell in the srd. It's quite clearly a common choice of phrasing. If you cannot provide this argument, then you cannot provide an argument against superb dispelling removing AMF.


I am no expert in Epic Magic, but I can't imagine something that does what Epic Teleport was shown to do has a DC that is even remotely within Xykon range. Do people understand how many people were on those boats V teleported (without permission) over a huge distance? Based on earlier numbers we were given, many, many thousands.

Number of people doesn't matter, weight does. Still, if we're talking about thousands of people in a single spell, it's essentially impossible. It was rule of plot, nothing more. The kind of caster who can make that kind of DC check would think the snarl was a cute distraction for their familiar to solo.

[Once&FutureKing]

I gave a detailed and nuanced explanation of why I don't think your reading of it is clear enough for us to automatically prop an ability to a spell that otherwise makes no mention of it whatever.

In particular, I pointed out that your reading was necessarily laced with subjectivity. You don't think Superb Dispel necessarily negates the (magical) after effects of say Gate or Imprisonment, which under a similarly broad reading of the Epic Dispel Seed it could. You don't necessarily think Superb Dispel should be able to undo a spell that turns the user into a God (and there are some of these, and not all are instantaneous). I posed these not as playful responses, but as a way of earnestly making you see the narrative you were imposing on the reading.

Now of course, some DM's might agree with that read you gave, and some might not, but the fact that it's so subjective means you can't just prop superb dispelling that ability and call it a day. It doesn't mention having that ability, and regardless of your what one in-house rule about it might be depending on your DM, the default position should be to go off what the spell actually says and no more.

[Morthis]

I gave a detailed and nuanced explanation of why I don't think your reading of it is clear enough for us to automatically prop an ability to a spell that otherwise makes no mention of it whatever.

In particular, I pointed out that your reading was necessarily laced with subjectivity. You don't think Superb Dispel necessarily negates the (magical) after effects of say Gate or Imprisonment, which under a similarly broad reading of the Epic Dispel Seed it could. You don't necessarily think Superb Dispel should be able to undo a spell that turns the user into a God (and there are some of these, and not all are instantaneous). I posed these not as playful responses, but as a way of earnestly making you see the narrative you were imposing on the reading.

Now of course, some DM's might agree with that read you gave, and some might not, but the fact that it's so subjective means you can't just prop superb dispelling that ability and call it a day. It doesn't mention having that ability, and regardless of your what one in-house rule about it might be depending on your DM, the default position should be to go off what the spell actually says and no more.

If we're going by what the spell actually says, why do you argue against it by giving us examples of spells you don't think it should be able to dispel because you personally believe it should not be able to?

If we go by what it actually says then we either accept it works on spells that normally can't be dispelled, as it says, or we accept that a vast majority of spells in D&D don't function as previously assumed because they all include the word "can" in the same type of phrasing as dispel seed.

[Math_Mage]

I am "capable of" killing a frost giant. It doesn't mean I will, or that I realistically can.

Sure, you have to fight it first. Just like S. Dispelling has to overcome a Dispel check first. Unlike the likelihood of your physically overcome a Frost Giant, the likelihood of S. Dispelling succeeding on that Dispel check is very high, but in both cases the capability is there.


A spell developed from that seed has the capacity to do X, but it doesn't mean the final product will do it, and looking at the final product of Superb Dispelling, it doesn't (unless we imagine it to have properties it need not have).

If you were talking about the Fortify seed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/fortify.htm), where 'can also' is used to describe an alternative to the typical +X enhancement bonus, then sure. Or if you were talking about the 'may also' in the Afflict seed as described above. Or even if you were talking about the use of 'can' in the Conjure seed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/conjure.htm) to describe a special interaction with the Life and Fortify seeds.

But no, you're talking about the 'can' in the Dispel seed, which is used in a description of the seed's basic properties (and thus the basic properties of any spell developed from that seed). It would be like if you interpreted the Destroy seed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/seeds/destroy.htm) so that some epic spells built from Destroy couldn't affect spells built from the Ward seed, because the language used is 'may also'. That's not how English works.


I also find this "it must be researched" distinction to be an unhelpful analogy. I mean, Sorcerer's can't technically "research" anything, they learn Magic "as a poet imagines words" (paraphrased), doing it all on instinct and imagination. Every single spell a sorcerer learns is essentially obtained that way, be it Epic or non-Epic. Xykon didn't read about cloister in a book and write it down in his spell book, for all we know he just looked at the headband and said "huh, I just thought up a great rhyme/spell!" (insert picture of Killer Bee). So while sometimes the text might refer to a sorcerer "researching" something, it doesn't really mean what it sounds like.

When Xykon "imagined" the fireball spell, he (might well) have no idea it existed in a book somewhere and was used by annoying wizards, as far as he's concerned it's original, and the same applies for Epic Spells, which he is able to learn in the same way as others. Exactly who first "invented" the spell is moot for the purposes of the game.

If I'd said the character had to research the spell...but I didn't. I, and the SRD, said the character had to develop the spell. The method of development is not specified, only the requirements, cost, and time taken. So be it imagination or reading in a book, the SRD doesn't care; the same rules apply, and the Dispel seed wording takes precedence. In your words, it's moot for the purposes of the game, just as the game doesn't care that Xykon might have thought his Fireball spell was original because it still wasn't developed in the rules sense the way an Epic spell was developed. Even Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage was not developed using the same rules; it was homebrewed.

Let's follow your logic to its conclusion for a second to show why it's absurd. Your argument is that because Xykon is a sorcerer, he doesn't research spells, therefore he doesn't develop them from the seed. Then a wizard, who DOES research spells in a book, must have developed it from the seed, and therefore his version of Superb Dispelling would be able to defeat non-epic spells where Xykon's can't. So, if Xykon was a wizard, his Superb Dispelling would work on an AMF; his S. Dispelling doesn't work because he's a sorcerer. Does that make sense? No. So the premise is nonsense.

A question that might actually be subjective is: can S. Dispelling undo instantaneous spells? (IMO the answer is No, because there's no magic left to affect, which doesn't change when you use an Epic dispel; for example, you can't use S. Dispelling to undo the instantaneous version of a Gate spell if the Gate isn't there anymore, just like you couldn't use S. Dispelling to undo the belief of someone who was lied to with aid of Glibness. But RAW doesn't clarify.) But the ability of S. Dispelling to function on spells whose only protection against regular dispels is a sentence in their description providing specific immunity? That's objectively extant.

[Chronos]

Quoth Once&FutureKing:

Gate is an awesome spell. But what Ganonron did seems to go well beyond Gate (NB rule: "You may hold the gate open only for a brief time (no more than 1 round per caster level), and you must concentrate on doing so, or else the interplanar connection is severed."), and his possession of Epic Teleport tells us he wasn't just relying on 9th level spells for his conjuring specialty.Oh, sure, I agree that Epic Teleport, as seen, is definitely epic. I'm just saying that the boastful description of him as teleporting armies across planes isn't necessarily. He might have a custom epic spell to just pop them in (in fact, that might be an option on Epic Teleport), but he doesn't necessarily have to.

Oh, and you also attributed some things to me that were said by others-- I think you might have gotten confused about whom you were quoting at various points.

[Once&FutureKing]

If we're going by what the spell actually says, why do you argue against it by giving us examples of spells you don't think it should be able to dispel because you personally believe it should not be able to?

If we go by what it actually says then we either accept it works on spells that normally can't be dispelled, as it says, or we accept that a vast majority of spells in D&D don't function as previously assumed because they all include the word "can" in the same type of phrasing as dispel seed.

You've once again missed the point. I don't think Superb Dispelling should be able to do more than the spell description grants it, so there is no problem of logical consistency on my end. There would only be a logical inconsistency if Superb Dispelling said "it can dispel God spells" and I said "well that's just ridiculous".

This has nothing to do with ignoring the functioning of D&D spells (though you've never once provided a serious example of this), it is the exact opposite, I am going off what the spells actually say, and where there is ambiguity the DM sorts it out. That's not the case here, where the spell does not mention the ability to do what you want it to do AT ALL in the spell description, and you want to read it in based on something vague elsewhere which involves a seed that was involved in developing the spell (that the GM would have to ok before it is allowed to exist).

You're the one who wants to ignore the written text of the spell, in order to add something else from the Seed used to develop the spell. Something else which may or may not mean what you want it to, and may or may not be in the final product of the spell. Again, I gave you examples of why your interpretation was a subjective narrative, and asked "how can you pick and choose which subjective thing it can dispel, and which it can't"? We never heard an answer.

[Once&FutureKing]

Quoth Once&FutureKing:
Oh, sure, I agree that Epic Teleport, as seen, is definitely epic. I'm just saying that the boastful description of him as teleporting armies across planes isn't necessarily. He might have a custom epic spell to just pop them in (in fact, that might be an option on Epic Teleport), but he doesn't necessarily have to.

Oh, and you also attributed some things to me that were said by others-- I think you might have gotten confused about whom you were quoting at various points.

No Chronos, I didn't. I just wanted to reply earlier all in one post, and assumed people would sort out who had written the text in each instance.

[Once&FutureKing]

As to Math Mage, you have misunderstood some of my points quite badly. For instance, nobody is trying to say that Superb Dispelling doesn't come from the dispel seed, that's obviously false. In fact the point I made (which you are responding to) is a refutation of almost the opposite point, the claim some of you are making that because it comes from the dispel seed, Superb Dispelling does not exist as a spell. That's a ridiculous conclusion.

For the purpose of shortening this exchange, I have 3 very simple questions which, if you answer clearly, will lead to the quick resolution of our discussion.

1. Can Superb Dispelling dispel the magic from the Redcloak? If not why not?

2. Can Superb Dispelling dispel the ongoing magical effects of Gate/Imprisonment? If not why not?

3. Can Superb Dispelling dispel Apotheosis Chrysalis? If not, why not?
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Apotheosis_Chrysalis_(3.5e_Epic_Spell)

Cheers

[WickedWizard17]

Someone could always just use the plan they had at Dorukans gate with roys sword if the teenage goblin hadnt warned him it might have worked. Both OOTS and the Linear guild have that ability at least as both have clerics. Although im not sure how Xykon has less HD than Durkon especially back then Malak might be a better bet as we dont know the full extent of his powers yet

Yeah, except, as we learned in SoD Xykon has a ring that protects him from positive energy attacks, which I assume the thing with Roy's sword was.

I think that regular!V and Redcloak tag-teaming Xykon (in my fantasy world this could happen because why yes I have visited the crack pairings thread) could take him down easy. They're both about level 17. I think V might even have a slight advance on RC's level, because he'd already achieved 17th level by the first fight with Gannji and Enor. Redcloak was slower to advance and gain XP because he spent so much time sitting on his fanny in Azure City.

[Gift Jeraff]

Yeah, except, as we learned in SoD Xykon has a ring that protects him from positive energy attacks, which I assume the thing with Roy's sword was.

I think that regular!V and Redcloak tag-teaming Xykon (in my fantasy world this could happen because why yes I have visited the crack pairings thread) could take him down easy. They're both about level 17. I think V might even have a slight advance on RC's level, because he'd already achieved 17th level by the first fight with Gannji and Enor. Redcloak was slower to advance and gain XP because he spent so much time sitting on his fanny in Azure City.That was 15th level, and it was only about 3 days ago in-universe.

[Morthis]

1. Can Superb Dispelling dispel the magic from the Redcloak? If not why not?

What do you mean by this? Dispel buffs he has cast? Of course, any dispel could (although obviously superb has a much better chance).


2. Can Superb Dispelling dispel the ongoing magical effects of Gate/Imprisonment? If not why not?

The duration of both of those is instantaneous. The spell needs to be ongoing, and instantaneous spells do not count as ongoing. Dispel seed starts by saying it can dispel ongoing spells. The definition of instantaneous spells is quite clear.


The spell energy comes and goes the instant the spell is cast, though the consequences might be long-lasting.


3. Can Superb Dispelling dispel Apotheosis Chrysalis? If not, why not?
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Apotheosis_Chrysalis_(3.5e_Epic_Spell)

This is a homebrew spell, it's hard to call any effects on a homebrew spell, and it does not address dispel magic at all. The duration is listed as permanent though, and if we simply look up what a permanent duration means we get this:


The energy remains as long as the effect does. This means the spell is vulnerable to dispel magic.

The rules explicitly say permanent spells are vulnerable to dispel magic. We can expand on this even more by adding this description from the rules of epic magic.


A lucky nonepic spellcaster casting greater dispel magic might be able to dispel an epic spell. The game mechanics do not change, and epic spells do not occupy any privileged position allowing them to resist being dispelled other than their presumably high caster level.

As you can see, it wouldn't even take an epic dispel to dispel this. However, dispel seed actually goes further and says this as well:


Any creature, object, or spell is potentially subject to the dispel seed, even the spells of gods and the abilities of artifacts.

So the rules flat out state that seed: dispel works on other spells you used as examples that it shouldn't work on (namely those from deities).

Honestly, I think you're just underestimating epic spells, perhaps because (as you admitted) you have limited experience with how they work. Do you realize that it's possible to develop an epic spell that effectively performs scry and die in one go? You can make an epic magic spell that, when you cast it, you can scry and then through your magical sensor cast a slay (save or die) spell. Epic spells have the potential to be that absurd, where it's possible to make a spell allowing your character to sit on their couch at home and kill someone else anywhere on the same plane of existence (or another plane but it'll be harder to cast then) without moving an inch from the location you're sitting at.

Edit: My example spell is purely from rules. So far oots has shown epic spells that are quite a bit more powerful what would be expected, so oots seems to err on the side of giving epic spells even more power.

[Once&FutureKing]

What do you mean by this? Dispel buffs he has cast? Of course, any dispel could (although obviously superb has a much better chance).

The Redcloak... that a Goblin of the same name (kinda) wears.


The duration of both of those is instantaneous. The spell needs to be ongoing, and instantaneous spells do not count as ongoing. Dispel seed starts by saying it can dispel ongoing spells. The definition of instantaneous spells is quite clear.

You should know what I'm getting at by now. While Gate or Imprisonment are cast "instantly", their effects continue afterwards, and in that regard they are ongoing, and the seed notes it can stop ongoing spells (or at least their effects). What I'm getting at is that there is no prohibition on it ending an instantaneous spell which is still going, anymore than there is an explicit ability to stop an AMF, the whole argument your side has presented is this sentence: "The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic." Ok, so why should we assume this means it stops an AMF (which is not mentioned at all), but not assume that it stops the ongoing effects of Gate or Imprisonment (which is also unmentioned). It's a subjective decision on your part to pick one and no the other, because you read "all spells" to mean something different to what someone else might read it to mean. I might read that and say "well, normally you can't stop a spell which says instantaneous casting time, but the epic dispel seed says it can defeat "all spells", even ones dispel can't normally stop, so this must include instant spells with ongoing effects.

That being the case it's highly problematic for you to selectively decide it applies in one case, but not the other, because you're imposing your own narrative on this and pretending it's objective.


This is a homebrew spell, it's hard to call any effects on a homebrew spell, and it does not address dispel magic at all. The duration is listed as permanent though, and if we simply look up what a permanent duration means we get this:

The rules explicitly say permanent spells are vulnerable to dispel magic. We can expand on this even more by adding this description from the rules of epic magic.

As you can see, it wouldn't even take an epic dispel to dispel this. However, dispel seed actually goes further and says this as well:

So the rules flat out state that seed: dispel works on other spells you used as examples that it shouldn't work on (namely those from deities).

Honestly, I think you're just underestimating epic spells, perhaps because (as you admitted) you have limited experience with how they work. Do you realize that it's possible to develop an epic spell that effectively performs scry and die in one go? You can make an epic magic spell that, when you cast it, you can scry and then through your magical sensor cast a slay (save or die) spell. Epic spells have the potential to be that absurd, where it's possible to make a spell allowing your character to sit on their couch at home and kill someone else anywhere on the same plane of existence (or another plane but it'll be harder to cast then) without moving an inch from the location you're sitting at.

Edit: My example spell is purely from rules. So far oots has shown epic spells that are quite a bit more powerful what would be expected, so oots seems to err on the side of giving epic spells even more power.

so many words, but no answers. All I asked for was a straight answer, then a reason. Would Superb Dispelling dispel Apotheosis Chrysalis or not? If so, see above problem about your own personal narrative, where "defeat all spells" means "yes" when I want it to, and "no" when I don't (based on a personal preference disguised as a reasoned one).

[ti'esar]

The Redcloak... that a Goblin of the same name (kinda) wears.

Redcloak is the goblin. The major artifact he wears is called the Crimson Mantle.

[SaintRidley]

1. Can Superb Dispelling dispel the magic from the Redcloak? If not why not?

You seem to mean the Crimson Mantle.

The answer is yes.

As noted, from the Dispel Seed:

Any creature, object, or spell is potentially subject to the dispel seed, even the spells of gods and the abilities of artifacts.

Just need to hit the dispel check against whatever the Dark One's caster level would count as at the time he created the artifact.

[Psyren]

Note that this would still follow the rules for dispelling magic items, i.e. the mantle's powers would be briefly suppressed, but not totally depowered. Furthermore, Xykon would have to target the mantle itself, not Redcloak.

And I doubt Xykon himself is much more than low-epic, i.e. powerful enough to match the Dark One's CL, so this is a dubious tactic at best.

[Cronos988]

You should know what I'm getting at by now. While Gate or Imprisonment are cast "instantly", their effects continue afterwards, and in that regard they are ongoing, and the seed notes it can stop ongoing spells (or at least their effects). What I'm getting at is that there is no prohibition on it ending an instantaneous spell which is still going, anymore than there is an explicit ability to stop an AMF, the whole argument your side has presented is this sentence: "The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic." Ok, so why should we assume this means it stops an AMF (which is not mentioned at all), but not assume that it stops the ongoing effects of Gate or Imprisonment (which is also unmentioned). It's a subjective decision on your part to pick one and no the other, because you read "all spells" to mean something different to what someone else might read it to mean. I might read that and say "well, normally you can't stop a spell which says instantaneous casting time, but the epic dispel seed says it can defeat "all spells", even ones dispel can't normally stop, so this must include instant spells with ongoing effects.

That being the case it's highly problematic for you to selectively decide it applies in one case, but not the other, because you're imposing your own narrative on this and pretending it's objective.


No. You are twisting the words around. Ongoing spell =/= ongoing effect.
The dispel seed is very specific, ongoing spells can be dispelled, and instantaneous spells are not ongoing, hence cannot be dispelled.

Dispelling instant spells goes against the basic logic of the idea of dispel, dispelling an AMF does not (as disjunction shows). It affects all spells, not all effects. By the way, its description is similar in this regard to normal dispel magic, which also states: "can dispel ongoing spells", and nowhere specifically states it cannot affect instant spells. So if a normal dispel cannot effect instant spells, neither can seed: dispel.

Consequently, the answers to your questions are:
- Yes
- No
- Yes



That's not the case here, where the spell does not mention the ability to do what you want it to do AT ALL in the spell description, and you want to read it in based on something vague elsewhere which involves a seed that was involved in developing the spell (that the GM would have to ok before it is allowed to exist).


That reasoning is unsound. The dispel seed is part of superb dispelling. it explicitly says so.



As to Math Mage, you have misunderstood some of my points quite badly. For instance, nobody is trying to say that Superb Dispelling doesn't come from the dispel seed, that's obviously false. In fact the point I made (which you are responding to) is a refutation of almost the opposite point, the claim some of you are making that because it comes from the dispel seed, Superb Dispelling does not exist as a spell


Superb Dispelling is the following:
"Seed: dispel (DC 19). Factors: additional +30 to dispel check (+30 DC), 1-action casting time (+20 DC). Mitigating factor: 10d6 backlash (-10 DC)."

Can you point out what part of the spell invalidates the ability "can affect all spells" of seed: dispel?



Even if it did mean "is capable of", that doesn't help your side, because while the seed "is capable" of being used to do [X], that doesn't mean a spell created from it will [always do X], and it doesn't tell us what the cost of this hypothetical spell would be. We know the cost and abilities of superb dispelling, and it makes no mention of the ability you want it to have, and which only certain readings of the Seed it comes from would grant it.


Ok, so we are agreed that it does mean "capable of"?
Your second sentence makes no sense: If Spell A is capable to do X, and is used to do X, it will do X, unless it fails a check. That is what everyone has been trying to tell you all along.
As to the costs, it does tell us what the cost is: The cost is a DC 19, the base cost of seed: dispel. As i have already pointed out, there are no factors available that can modify the capabilities of a seed. So it is impossible to do what you claim needs to be done.



I wish people would read more carefully before they say things. The "Xykon would win" side wants Xykon to cast multiple spells per turn, and he can't. If Xykon uses his first round to cast Maximized Energy Drain, then he can't also use his first round to "counter spell" the AMF, because that will be up by the next round (Xykon just used his turn to cast MED!), and once it's up Greater Dispel (which we don't even know Xykon HAS) becomes useless! The moment the AMF is up (ignoring the ridiculous attempt to re-write superb dispelling that is going on), Xykon has to run. So if it's the first turn, and the Dragon goes first, Xykon literally has to run on the very first action (with teleport), or he will be grappled next turn (which assures his death in the AMF). If Xykon casts first, the Dragon's first move is AMF, in which case Xykon must run again (with teleport), or he'll immediately be grappled (assuring his death in the AMF). This is not a winning strategy by Xykon, it's fleeing at once, or dying (which remember, shows much more sense than we've seen Xykon show in battle thus far).

I struggle to imagine how Xykon can win (without granting him abilities he isn't shown to have), because he can't stop the AMF (even if he goes first), and then once it's up he's got no way to really hurt the Dragon. He also becomes an ordinary skeleton in the field who will be crushed to powder.


I have never said anything about energy draining first. Xykon has way more 6th level spells than an ABD, if he can counterspell one AMF, he can counterspell all of them.
I am not sure whether or not he can, thats for sure, but I admitted as much. Though, since he did research superb dispelling, does that not mean that he needs to have at least one spell with the dispel seed? And since any dispel can be used as a counter spell, and Xykon has a very good chance of winning the dispel check, if he can ready an action before the ABD casts, he can counterspell any AMF.

Of course without a means to dispel or counterspell an AMF, Xykon, as a full caster with literally nothing but his magic to protect him, looses. No-one really doubts that. He can stall the battle by simply porting away, but thats not winning. Its the same for pretty much any melee engagement though. If V can cast AMF while the Order battles Xykon, the outcome would be quite similar. No DR vs. 3 mid level melee characters would probably kill him in what, 3 rounds?

[Once&FutureKing]

So Superb Dispelling can turn a God back into a mortal. I'll just let that sink in for a second, and let everyone consider the absurdity of that statement.

Some mid tier Epic Spell, which a level 21 caster could perform, can turn a god into a human... despite no real indication it can do something like this (except interpreting the phrase "can defeat all spells" in the most broad way", and despite the fact you admit it can only suppress the powers of artifacts made by said gods (if that). :smallamused:

Oh, and if Xykon does have dispel magic, and uses it as a repeated counter spell, the Dragon can just fly out of range/teleport-a-few-miles-away, put the field on, and fly right back, after which Xykon again has to port away again the first chance he gets.

[Cronos988]

So Superb Dispelling can turn a God back into a mortal. I'll just let that sink in for a second, and let everyone consider the absurdity of that statement.


wait, what? No of course not. It can dispel the cocoon, which was the spell you linked. Once the transformation is complete, so is the spell, and there is nothing left to dispel.

Mind you, even a normal dispel magic can dispel the epic spell you linked, as Morthis' reasoning clearly shows.



Oh, and if Xykon does have dispel magic, and uses it as a repeated counter spell, the Dragon can just fly out of range/teleport-a-few-miles-away, put the field on, and fly right back, after which Xykon again has to port away again the first chance he gets.

Or he just follows the dragon with his own teleport? Was the basic idea not a 1 on 1 standoff in an arena-like environment? Yes, if the dragon shows up with his AMF on, Xykon has to teleport away, he cannot counterspell and probably does not have enough epic spells to defeat 6 AMFs.

I wonder if you can still target a creature directly if it is partly enclosed in an AMF. I mean what would happen if you energy Drain the dragons head, or wings?

[Once&FutureKing]

1) Teleport doesn't work that way. You can't say "teleport me to some dragon that I can't see and don't know the location of". Once he's out of line of sight Xykon can't teleport to him.
2) No sensible way energy drain would work if you somehow hit his wings with it. It would be ridiculous.
3)
a) dispelling the cocoon that creates a god... yeh...
b) So a permanent spell can't be Superb Dispelled? That's what you're saying? Despite the claim by some S.Dispelling can dispel "all spells"? Just want to be clear on your position here (though strangely you believe it suppresses artifacts, godly spells and permanent supernatural abilities, of people or weapons). Why doesn't it suppress the god spell here, so the subject is mortal?

[Psyren]

Permanent spells and Instantaneous spells are not the same thing. Permanent spells can be dispelled because the spell itself is still ongoing. Instantanous spells cannot, because the spell itself is no longer in operation, only its result.

I'm not sure where the "turn a god into a human" stuff is coming from, as there are no written spells that create gods to my knowledge. Even Pun-Pun had to invent one.

[luc258]

Anti Magic Field sounds a bit overpowered. What would stop Vaarsuvius from researching it and cast it next to Xykon while Roy happily hacks away at him?
Aren't there some viable counters to that apart from Disjunction?

[Psyren]

Anti Magic Field sounds a bit overpowered. What would stop Vaarsuvius from researching it and cast it next to Xykon while Roy happily hacks away at him?
Aren't there some viable counters to that apart from Disjunction?

How will he get next to Xykon when he can't teleport and won't be able to fly?

[Ancalagon]

I can only assume you're confused. Here is how you sound; "you said Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen were transcendent basketball players... but you didn't say Horace Grant was, so that hurts 33% of your argument". Huh?

We are talking about Persons: A, B, C whose souls are shackled to Vaarsvius and you say "I exclude Person A". How is A not integral part of A, B, C?


That's not the exact wording, but sure, V loses a splice he's weaker. You know what else was said?

No? Let's ask the fiends:

"The amount of raw energy from your four combined souls would dwarf that wielded by any mortal arcane spellcaster who as ever lived."
Pretty much what I said, no?


That he would be unable to gain XP because he's so far beyond everyone, and (according to the Oracle) he would gain ultimate arcane power. There's nothing very ultimate about being weaker than Xykon. I really hope you're not pitching for a bizarre reading of "dwarf" to mean "he had a much bigger number of spells available", because I don't think that's even a remotely sensible reading in context (particularly not with all the other things we were told by the fiends/oracle, and the things we saw).

Oh god, please not again. I thought we were beyond that. Not another argument of the style "The Power Vaarsuvius got was not Ultimate because he lost against Xykon".
Rich Burlew has confirmed Vaarsuivus got his Ultimate Arcane Power that was as ultimate as it can get. Word of God (the author) contradicts you. Vaarusvius lost because he was stupid on the application of that power.
Vaarsuvius wielded more raw energy than any arcane caster ever has wielded, which is exactly what the fiends promised. He still lost. In D&D you can win vs someone whose level is higher than yours. Groups win such fights all the time (called bossfights).
Your personal attacks on my view change nothing about the fact you are dead wrong.


Ok, this is a genuine reading error on my part. I still think it's pretty clear Tarquin has the resources the crush Xykon, but not as obviously as I thought.

Yes, it is a reading error (actually, I think it is an understanding error but let's not argue that). No, it is nothing minor. The part here was your support to claim how powerful Tarquin was and could easily wipe out Xykon. With your error, your whole argument falls apart until you can make a new argument. Again: it falls apart and is gone.


A quest he couldn't have a hope [...]

I have no idea what this has to do with anything. Yes, Xykon is not literally invincible. Yes, he also has to work for his plan. Yes, he needs assistance. So what?


So some caster who was not one of my examples of a caster who dwarfed Xykon was level 24-28 at most... um, ok. But he wasn't one of my arguments? :smallconfused:

We have no idea if one of the casters dwarved Xykon on their own. We cannot know. And even if he or she did, would she have still dwarved him without his or her level XXX body but being tied to Vaarsuvius's one?
Therefore, we have been looking at the whole team all the time. Well, apart from you - and my point (that you refuse to even to see) all along was you really cannot do that here.
And even if you are correct, what would it change if it came out one or two of the casters had Xykon's Level +X? The IFCC still spoke about the Team of Four that would be stronger than anyone who ever was an arcane caster.

[Morthis]

The Redcloak... that a Goblin of the same name (kinda) wears.

The Crimson Mantle would be suppressed, the rules quite clearly state this in the part about deity spells and artifacts I linked.


You should know what I'm getting at by now. While Gate or Imprisonment are cast "instantly", their effects continue afterwards, and in that regard they are ongoing, and the seed notes it can stop ongoing spells (or at least their effects).

No, the seed says ongoing spells. Instantaneous spells, as the definition quite clearly says, use up their magic the second they are cast, there's nothing left to dispel. There is no ambiguity here, because the seed itself clearly places the limitation that it must be an ongoing spell. Heck, the description for instantaneous spells even makes this perfectly clear, their effect may last longer, but the spell comes and goes immediately. This is the very reason why spells like gate and imprisonment are part of this category.

This has nothing to do with open ended interpretations or anything, the dispel seed text itself opens up by setting this limit, and instantaneous spells with ongoing effects are very different in D&D rules than ongoing spells with ongoing effects, which is exactly why they made specific rules to point out the difference.


What I'm getting at is that there is no prohibition on it ending an instantaneous spell which is still going, anymore than there is an explicit ability to stop an AMF, the whole argument your side has presented is this sentence: "The dispel seed can defeat all spells, even those not normally subject to dispel magic."

It says it can defeat spells not normally subject to dispel magic. There is a small grouping of spells which, in their description, says dispel magic does not work on them. Their description specifically says this, because the spell itself should otherwise be vulnerable (meaning it's not instantaneous). It's quite clear that this small grouping of spells, which includes AMF, is what superb dispelling works on. They fall within the limits of dispel seed (they are an ongoing spell), but they cannot be removed by a normal dispel.


so many words, but no answers. All I asked for was a straight answer, then a reason. Would Superb Dispelling dispel Apotheosis Chrysalis or not? If so, see above problem about your own personal narrative, where "defeat all spells" means "yes" when I want it to, and "no" when I don't (based on a personal preference disguised as a reasoned one).

This is not a personal preference disguised as a reasoned one. I gave you all the rules as to why it is dispellable. Did you even read what I wrote? I'm beginning to think you just type up stubborn reply after stubborn reply for the sake of arguing, without giving any consideration to whether or not we actually have a point. Here I'll sum up what I said.

1) Your god spell is homebrew and we are discussing core. I could write a level 1 spell that turns you into a level 40 deity, but when dispelled it kills you. Then we could argue how stupid that it, but that wouldn't be dispel's fault, it would be my silly spell.
2) The rules quite clearly state that even greater dispel magic can dispel epic spells, which includes your god spell since it does not say anything about being undispellable.
3) The description of permanent spells further even explicitly says that permanent spells are vulnerable to dispelling
4) Seed: Dispel explicitly says it can dispel spells cast by gods and temporarily suppress artifacts
5) Once you are reborn as demigod, I imagine the spell effect ends because you are now reborn. The spell does not clearly state this though, and there's no other rules to fall back on for this because, once again, it's homebrew. It's up to whoever wrote it to think of all the possible outcomes and explain them, because we have no basis to compare the spell to.

[Da'Shain]

Once&FutureKing, considering that you're the only one arguing for your interpretation of it, and that the vast majority of people with actual rules experience posting disagree while still admitting that the ABD has a decent chance against Xykon, don't you think it's time to, maybe, reevaluate your position? As I said earlier, any DM who knew the epic spellcasting rules would rule that Superb Dispelling works here, which seems to have been borne out. Your point that the ABD has the ability to defeat Xykon still stands, just not that she's favored to win. As it is, this thread has devolved into multiple people all trying to explain the same thing to you, and you either not getting it or disregarding it while using, frankly, antagonistic language and strawman arguments.

[Obnoxious Hydra]

Hey, just say if you want me to change the thread name to something like 'Xykon, AMFs and Dispell Magic for dummies"


I'm cool with that.

[Once&FutureKing]

Permanent spells and Instantaneous spells are not the same thing. Permanent spells can be dispelled because the spell itself is still ongoing. Instantanous spells cannot, because the spell itself is no longer in operation, only its result.

I'm not sure where the "turn a god into a human" stuff is coming from, as there are no written spells that create gods to my knowledge. Even Pun-Pun had to invent one.

There is alot of stuff flying around in reply, quite a bit of which I've answered, so for now I'm going to limit my reply to one point that I'd like resolved. Note the bolded above, which is what I was getting at. Permanent spells can be dispelled. See also this description:

Permanent:
The energy remains as long as the effect does. This means the spell is vulnerable to dispel magic.
Ok,
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Apotheosis_Chrysalis_(3.5e_Epic_Spell)
Oh look, the duration is permanent. Yet I'm being told by some of you that Superb Dispelling can't turn a god back into a mortal... this appears to be a narrative on your behalf, because it sure isn't what the rules say. Why?

[SaintRidley]

You are aware that not all gods were once mortals, that not all gods who were once mortals used that spell, and that dandwiki is a laughably bad collection of homebrew that no person familiar with the rules of the game would bother to take seriously, yes?


By the way, the effect of the spell is the Chrysalis. You dispel the Chrysalis. As you'll note, the godling can go back into the Chrysalis repeatedly to raise divine rank. The Chrysalis does not go away after casting. The Dispel would have no effect on the godling's Divine Rank, and it is only you who are assuming that anybody has said so.

[Cronos988]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Apotheosis_Chrysalis_(3.5e_Epic_Spell)
Oh look, the duration is permanent. Yet I'm being told by some of you that Superb Dispelling can't turn a god back into a mortal... this appears to be a narrative on your behalf, because it sure isn't what the rules say. Why?

You misread the spell.
The cocoon is permanent. Permanency does not refer to the godhood which is gained, but to the fact that the cocoon will stay forever unless it gains enough energy for the transformation.

If it were otherwise then, as it was noted, a simple "dispel magic" could dispel the godhood granted from apotheosis chryalis, as dispel magic does affect permanent spells. Epic spells play no role in that discussion.

[Math_Mage]

As to Math Mage, you have misunderstood some of my points quite badly. For instance, nobody is trying to say that Superb Dispelling doesn't come from the dispel seed, that's obviously false. In fact the point I made (which you are responding to) is a refutation of almost the opposite point, the claim some of you are making that because it comes from the dispel seed, Superb Dispelling does not exist as a spell. That's a ridiculous conclusion.

Nope. The claim we're making is that because S. Dispelling must be developed from the Dispel Seed, S. Dispelling has all the fundamental abilities of the Dispel seed. That is an eminently reasonable conclusion. I don't appreciate your straw man argument.

Further support for the premise:


Epic Spell Development

Before it can be cast, an epic spell must be developed. The process of development can be a time-consuming and expensive process. It is during development that a caster determines whether a given epic spell lies within his or her abilities or beyond them. The basis of that determination lies in an epic spell’s Spellcraft DC.

The easiest way to develop an epic spell is to use one already given. The description of each of these unique spells gives the amount of gold, time, and experience points required to develop the spell. If a character pays a spell’s development cost, he or she develops (and thus knows) that spell.

For information on developing an epic spell completely from scratch, see Developing Epic Spells.

That is to say, even if a spell is listed in the book (as opposed to being developed from scratch), a character looking to use that spell must still develop it from the seed.

Lastly, I can't help but laugh when you try to support your argument by using a D&DWiki homebrew epic spell as an example, and then you misread the epic spell. You should probably avoid doing that.

[Psyren]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Apotheosis_Chrysalis_(3.5e_Epic_Spell)
Oh look, the duration is permanent. Yet I'm being told by some of you that Superb Dispelling can't turn a god back into a mortal... this appears to be a narrative on your behalf, because it sure isn't what the rules say. Why?

Is that spell from an actual sourcebook? I'd like to look it up and I wouldn't trust dandwiki to tell me that paladins can smite evil.

[Da'Shain]

Is that spell from an actual sourcebook? I'd like to look it up and I wouldn't trust dandwiki to tell me that paladins can smite evil.If you look at the bottom of its page, its in the Homebrew section, so no, it's not from any sourcebook.

It's also completely ridiculous. 50 Spellcraft DC to create a vessel that grants godhood? Even the requirement for a deity-crafted artifact is child's play for an epic caster, although "a piece of the sun" is sufficiently vague as to be interesting.

[shadowkiller]

You guys have some impressive ranks in Knowledge: (Rules) and Profession: (Lawyer) but this comic has enough house rules in it that you can't really use RAW as a perfect basis. So you guys can continue to argue about poorly written epic magic rules or we can bring it back to the comic.

I say Shojo will be the one to defeat Xykon, thoughts?

[Math_Mage]

You guys have some impressive ranks in Knowledge: (Rules) and Profession: (Lawyer) but this comic has enough house rules in it that you can't really use RAW as a perfect basis. So you guys can continue to argue about poorly written epic magic rules or we can bring it back to the comic.

I say Shojo will be the one to defeat Xykon, thoughts?

Not sure why that's a more reasonable subtopic to discuss than the particulars of MBD's chances against Xykon...the reason we got to this point is because basically every other case is unambiguous enough to be handled by now.

[Once&FutureKing]

I had a very long reply that I lost when my computer crashed. I was going to re-type it, but I don't see the point, since you are not going to concede (your next argument has already been foreshadowed, the god spell doesn't count because it's homebrew).

Suffice to say, I do not agree with your broad reading of the dispel seed to suggest it always does what you want it to, nor do I feel a sensible application of the English language leads to that conclusion either. Certainly not to the degree that we should just prop Superb Dispelling an ability it makes no reference whatever to having.

None of which changes the essential point, that Xykon's chances against the Dragon are quite bad, and that there exist a number of other characters who would (or should have) beaten him, some by curbstomping margins (Ganonron, Haerta, etc).

[Ast]

First things first: hello, as I am a new member of the boards (I've been watching them for few years but decided to register mere minutes ago).

Now I would like to respond to the post above:

1. No one says that superb dispelling always does what it does. It only "can" do what is described in the dispel seed descritpion and that has been mentioned before. Many times. The word "can" directly corresponds to the fact that you have to make a succesful dispel check. Hence "can", not "will always".
2. The silly example you gave from dandwiki has one significant problem and it is not the fact that it's homebrew. In fact, most of the epic spells are homebrew to some degree. No, the main problem is that this spell is extremely poor written, with no seeds given whatsoever, no factors listed and no time given that is needed to change you into a god. I will say what is needed: this spell is pure trash and should not be even considered as an example. Not because it's too powerful. Only because someone decided 'hey, let's create a spell that turns you into a god, disregarding any rules for creating epic spells, ignoring epic seed and factor descriptions and setting DC for 50 for some unknown reason'. Furthermore, as for now the spell is unavailable.
3. There is an epic spell, I believe, in PGtF which counts as High Magic for the Elves. This spell's description specifically says that you can resurrect some creatures. What it doesn't say is the loss of level or atribute (I don't think there is an errata for that). And yet the spell is based on life seed which specifically says that the loss of level is inevitable. Situation almost the same as with SD and I think almost everybody should rule that the loss of level in fact is a part of this spell.

[Math_Mage]

I had a very long reply that I lost when my computer crashed. I was going to re-type it, but I don't see the point, since you are not going to concede (your next argument has already been foreshadowed, the god spell doesn't count because it's homebrew).

Er...many people have already demonstrated that even if we take this example homebrew god spell and see how S. Dispelling interacts with it, your interpretation is still wrong because you didn't understand what your homebrew god spell does. The fact that we shouldn't be using homebrew as a basis for interpreting the SRD is merely icing on the cake.


Suffice to say, I do not agree with your broad reading of the dispel seed to suggest it always does what you want it to, nor do I feel a sensible application of the English language leads to that conclusion either. Certainly not to the degree that we should just prop Superb Dispelling an ability it makes no reference whatever to having.

Right, because when the seed says "can defeat any non-epic spell," it actually means "...except on Sundays. And when we don't explicitly and redundantly note it in the spell description. And when Simon says it can't."


None of which changes the essential point, that Xykon's chances against the Dragon are quite bad, and that there exist a number of other characters who would (or should have) beaten him, some by curbstomping margins (Ganonron, Haerta, etc).

This I agree with. Xykon would start out with his usual fire-and-lightning nonsense and end up in an inescapable AMF grapple, barring unusual terrain. And Haerta certainly had mind-blowing power.

[Cronos988]

I had a very long reply that I lost when my computer crashed. I was going to re-type it, but I don't see the point, since you are not going to concede (your next argument has already been foreshadowed, the god spell doesn't count because it's homebrew).


There is no need to foreshadow. It has been stated that the cocoon is the permanent part of the spell and consequently the part that is dispelled. You fail to adress that point because, apparently, there is no sensible argument against it. So you prefer to act like the argument was never made. But hey, whatever.



Suffice to say, I do not agree with your broad reading of the dispel seed to suggest it always does what you want it to, nor do I feel a sensible application of the English language leads to that conclusion either. Certainly not to the degree that we should just prop Superb Dispelling an ability it makes no reference whatever to having.


You are entitled to that opinion, but since you are the only one dissenting and every one of your arguments has been refuted, I think we are beyond a reasonable doubt here.




None of which changes the essential point, that Xykon's chances against the Dragon are quite bad, and that there exist a number of other characters who would (or should have) beaten him, some by curbstomping margins (Ganonron, Haerta, etc).

With that I agree. Its probably a good idea to get back to topic.

The pont is Xykon is a full caster geared to fight other casters. His only extraordinary protection is his Lich form. Anyone that can shut down his magic will crush him.

That does, however, mean that the Linear guild lacks the means against Xykon. Maybe Malack can cast mass death ward, but Xykon can still meteor swarm them. Tarquin alone has no chance. And sending whole armies against Xykon will just give him a lot of Zombies.

So far the order really has the only setup that is able to beat Xykon (which is not utterly surprising I guess). The MitD seems unlikely, a low will save against an epic level lich is really not fun at all.

[Ast]

I am aware of the fact that we know very little about V's Master, but if there is some degree of truth to what the fiends said about him being able to vanquish the dragon, he might stand a chance. Everything depends on the preparation :>

[Kish]

I say Shojo will be the one to defeat Xykon, thoughts?
...You think Xykon's going to be defeated by a fourteen-level aristocrat who is dead, isn't in the comic anymore, and, when you get right down to it, was always a pretty minor character?

[KoboldRevenge]

...You think Xykon's going to be defeated by a fourteen-level aristocrat who is dead, isn't in the comic anymore, and, when you get right down to it, was always a pretty minor character?

Did you see what these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html)ghosts did to Xykon?

Shojo could come back at ANY time. Small tongue.

@v Yea but with ghosty powers he could get other people to kill Xykon for him.:smalltongue:

[Ancalagon]

Did you see what these (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html)ghosts did to Xykon?

Shojo is not Soon.

And apart from that, Soon is dead as well.

And apart from that, the Ghost Martyrs are gone.

And apart from that, Xykon has now learned he can hurt those ghost-things with Force-based magic.

[SaintRidley]

Shojo is not Soon.

And apart from that, Soon is dead as well.

And apart from that, the Ghost Martyrs are gone.

And apart from that, Xykon has now learned he can hurt those ghost-things with Force-based magic.

Apart from that Ghost Martyrs had PC class levels...

... with martial weapon proficiencies

... geared toward killing the undead and other evil creatures

Yeah, Shojo as any kind of positive energy spirit just wouldn't be doing much against Xykon.

[Psyren]

I had a very long reply that I lost when my computer crashed. I was going to re-type it, but I don't see the point, since you are not going to concede (your next argument has already been foreshadowed, the god spell doesn't count because it's homebrew).


Obvious counterarguments are indeed easy to predict :smalltongue: But I'm glad you at least realized it.

Anyway, there's not much else to add to that matchup besides "the dragon would be a tough fight for Xykon." But tough fight and auto-win aren't at all the same thing.

[Ancalagon]

Apart from that Ghost Martyrs had PC class levels...
... with martial weapon proficiencies
... geared toward killing the undead and other evil creatures
Yeah, Shojo as any kind of positive energy spirit just wouldn't be doing much against Xykon.

And? Shojo was no Paladin, so he does not become a Ghost Martyr and Xykon only lost because there were... dozens of them - including an epic paladin. Shojo was also no fighter, so it's unlikely he alone would be able to do a lot.
And this leaves aside that he was a minor character.

And even if that all was a non-issue, then the Martyrs are all still gone and well as souls in their afterlife. What bound the souls to the mortal plane and the souls into ghost martyrs is has dissolved. And gone in this context means dead or am I mistaken?

I'm also not sure if there was sarcasm. There was, no?

[SaintRidley]

And? Shojo was no Paladin, so he does not become a Ghost Martyr and Xykon only lost because there were... dozens of them - including an epic paladin. Shojo was also no fighter, so it's unlikely he alone would be able to do a lot.
And this leaves aside that he was a minor character.

And even if that all was a non-issue, then the Martyrs are all still gone and well as souls in their afterlife. What bound the souls to the mortal plane and the souls into ghost martyrs is has dissolved. And gone in this context means dead or am I mistaken?

I'm also not sure if there was sarcasm. There was, no?

I was adding to your post to reinforce how silly the argument that dead Shojo is anything close to the power level of dead Soon.

[Ancalagon]

I was adding to your post to reinforce how silly the argument that dead Shojo is anything close to the power level of dead Soon.

Ok, no sarcasm then. ;)

I think the previous poster just confused the two, though.

[Krakes]

I'd like to think that O-Chul could beat him if he were properly armed and armored, instead of wearing a loincloth and wielding an iron bar.

[shadowkiller]

I'm also not sure if there was sarcasm. There was, no?

There was loads of sarcasm when I originally posted that idea.

[Ancalagon]

There was loads of sarcasm when I originally posted that idea.

There are smiley's to indicate that. Everyone thought you were serious & somewhat confused. :smallwink:

[Chronos]

I'd like to think that O-Chul could beat him if he were properly armed and armored, instead of wearing a loincloth and wielding an iron bar.Only if Xykon is toying with him, and doesn't realize for a very long time to stop toying. O-Chul is extremely good at surviving, but that won't let him actually defeat Xykon. Besides, we've already seen Xykon casually defeat O-Chul with all of his gear and backed up by a bunch of other mid-high level paladins.

[Ast]

Yep, I also can't vote for O-Chul. In fact, I don't see in this role anyone who fights melee and has no magic support. I mean, O-Chul can't even fly! And if Xykon feels threatened, he can buy himself some time casting "Xykon's Moderately Escapable Forcecage" (provided he didn't swap this spell).

Same for Tarquin — I mean, the only viable tactic for him would be throwing another magic user as his champion against Xykon :smallbiggrin:

[FlawedParadigm]

I'm going to go for the Order, including Belkar who dies in a heroic sacrifice, along with possibly Nale, Tarquin, and/or Malack once they understand exactly how powerful Team Evil is. O-Chul and MitD may also be taking part as well, on one or both sides for the Monster. I'm picturing an epic and multi-sided massive conflict all around. Sort of like the end of Merlin's story in The Great Book of Amber.

[ti'esar]

I'm going to go for the Order, including Belkar who dies in a heroic sacrifice, along with possibly Nale, Tarquin, and/or Malack once they understand exactly how powerful Team Evil is. O-Chul and MitD may also be taking part as well, on one or both sides for the Monster. I'm picturing an epic and multi-sided massive conflict all around. Sort of like the end of Merlin's story in The Great Book of Amber.

Personally, I suspect that the Linear Guild (in whatever form) is going to be pretty much out of the picture by the end of the current arc. But you never know.

[Alienist]

- A god. Excluding Banjo and Giggles, maybe Banjhulu. Xykon might have a chance against the Dark One or the Elven gods though, as technically their mortals who rose to power, so they might be able to be killed more easily than the 'true' gods.


No, we need Elan (and Banjo, Giggles and Banjhulu) alive so that he can re-seed the pantheons after they are destroyed/sacrifice themselves in a last ditch attempt to destroy the snarl.