In which D&D edition is Demogorgon the toughest threat?

[Tvtyrant]

Basically what it says on the tin. I have the AD&D monster manual, the 3.5 and the 4E ones. Demogorgon has similar powers in them, but the amount of HP goes up from edition to edition. So the question is in which edition is Demogorgon the toughest threat at the appropriate level.

[vasharanpaladin]

Inconclusive. At the appropriate level in AD&D and Revised Third, Demogorgon is completely and utterly curbstomped by any party containing at least one (1) spellcaster capable of 9th-level spells.

At the appropriate level in 4e, not only does Demogorgon get similarly curbstomped by any party capable of effective attacks with appropriate damage for their level, his statblock is pre-MM3 and thus he's particularly vulnerable to focus-fire, AND his attacks don't deal enough damage to be a significant threat.

[Rhynn]

The amount of hp going up is part of the general hp-and-damage inflation. In AD&D 1E and 2E, your 15th-level fighter can very well be averaging less than 15 damage per attack.

Also, toughest for what level characters in what sort of party? 4E assumes 4-5, maybe 3-6 PCs. 3.X assumes 5. 2E assumes nothing, 1E assumes nothing but excepts party sizes in the 6-12 range. And then there's level. "15th level", for instance, means completely different things in 1E, 2E, 3E, and 4E.

[Exediron]

... At the appropriate level in AD&D and Revised Third, Demogorgon is completely and utterly curbstomped by any party containing at least one (1) spellcaster capable of 9th-level spells

How so?

I say that he is much tougher in AD&D, and is actually a pretty decent threat. Although as there aren't really any guidelines for determining 'appropriate level' in AD&D we might have a different level range in mind.

[Talakeal]

Are there even stats for Demogorgon in 2E?

Isn't he listed as a lesser god, which more or less means "I win." barring interference by a plot device?

Or are we just talking about the avatar?

[Rhynn]

AD&D 1E Demogorgon has 95% magic resistance (so much for spells), 200 hp (vs. 9th level fighter's average 49.5 before Con, flat +3 per level after 9th), AC -8, tail energy drains four levels, etc.

No idea about A&D 2E stats, but almost everything else is ported direct from 1E (often too direct, without even doing necessary updates for 2E), so I expect it'd work as-is.

[Jay R]

Original D&D, I would imagine, but I can't be sure. I never met any players stupid enough to attack.

He was the one who could gate in Balrogs, until the Tokien estate noticed.

[Khedrac]

The most powerful fully statted version is in (Metzner) Gold-Box Immortal D&D where she is an Empyreal (iirc) of Entropy and the second most powerful Entropy immortal there is. How she compares to an equivalent player party though, I don't know.

[Rhynn]

The most powerful fully statted version is in (Metzner) Gold-Box Immortal D&D where she is an Empyreal (iirc) of Entropy and the second most powerful Entropy immortal there is. How she compares to an equivalent player party though, I don't know.

I'm not sure even people who played that "game" would be able to tell. I can't make head nor tails of it...

[137beth]

Also, toughest for what level characters in what sort of party? 4E assumes 4-5, maybe 3-6 PCs. 3.X assumes 5. 2E assumes nothing, 1E assumes nothing but excepts party sizes in the 6-12 range.
3E assumes a party of four, not five. 4E assumes a party of 5.

[Tvtyrant]

AD&D 1E Demogorgon has 95% magic resistance (so much for spells), 200 hp (vs. 9th level fighter's average 49.5 before Con, flat +3 per level after 9th), AC -8, tail energy drains four levels, etc.

No idea about A&D 2E stats, but almost everything else is ported direct from 1E (often too direct, without even doing necessary updates for 2E), so I expect it'd work as-is.

I have the first one, but I don't know enough about the game to know how dangerous things are. I did note that he has more health than the other Demon Lords.

[BWR]

It's been a while since I delved into the Immortal rules, but IIRC Immortals could basically do whatever they want to poor non-Immortals.
Demogorgon might be the most powerful listed demon in those books, but there were several even more impressive things there, like the Draeden.

[Khedrac]

I'm not sure even people who played that "game" would be able to tell. I can't make head nor tails of it...
I never actually played Immortals rules but I think I worked out how they worked. The big problem was having to fight to level every level. I think the WotI re-write was a much more sensible set of rules.

And yes, there were things nastier than Demogorgon, (not sure if Draeden were much nastier, after all their defence mechanism to get immortals not to bother them involved immortals seeing them as something like Demogorgon) but there are nastier things than Demogorgon is most editions - the question still stood.

Come to think of it I think Demogorgon ended up a Hierarch of Entropy in the WotI re-write as they removed the 2/sphere cap - that would make her (/him/it/them) tougher still.

[BWR]

WEll, the wussiest Draeden had 100 HD to Demogorogn's 40 and was worth about the same amount.
The most powerful had 200+ HD and were worth about three times as much. Sure, assigning xp values in those days were even more random than CR assignments now, but the intention, I would assume, was that the Draeden were about the nastiest thing you could come across.
I'm not quite sure where megaliths come in on the bad-ass scale.

Anyway, regarding the OP it wasn't BECMI where Demogorgon was the strongest enemy.

[Jerthanis]

Doesn't the AD&D statblock specify that he can only be harmed by beings with 12 or more hit dice? Don't PCs stop gaining Hit dice at 9 for fighters, 10 for spellcasters?

Doesn't this mean he can never be beaten by any regular PC party ever, regardless their levels or composition?

[SimonMoon6]

AD&D 1E Demogorgon has 95% magic resistance (so much for spells),

I wouldn't count spells out completely. Don't forget that 1st edition magic resistance wasn't a flat amount, but could change depending on the level of the caster. Every level above 11th level would reduce the magic resistance by 5%. So, 95% is still a huge amount, but to a 17th level caster, that would only be 65%, which is annoying but one out of every three spells should get through.

However, my anecdotal evidence is that fewer 1st edition characters would get to such high level compared to characters in other editions. (It takes so long to go up levels in 1st edition and most players want to quit once their multi-classed characters have maxed out their levels.)

[Jay R]

I wouldn't count spells out completely. Don't forget that 1st edition magic resistance wasn't a flat amount, but could change depending on the level of the caster. Every level above 11th level would reduce the magic resistance by 5%. So, 95% is still a huge amount, but to a 17th level caster, that would only be 65%, which is annoying but one out of every three spells should get through.

But that was not true in Original D&D, where 95% magic resistance means 95%.

Besides, as I mentioned earlier, the original Demogorgon could gate in Balrogs.

Gate.

In.

Balrogs.

[BWR]

But that was not true in Original D&D, where 95% magic resistance means 95%.

Besides, as I mentioned earlier, the original Demogorgon could gate in Balrogs.

Gate.

In.

Balrogs.

Otherwise known as 'gate in balor'.
Just renamed the balrog after a Celtic god.

[hamlet]

AD&D 1E Demogorgon has 95% magic resistance (so much for spells), 200 hp (vs. 9th level fighter's average 49.5 before Con, flat +3 per level after 9th), AC -8, tail energy drains four levels, etc.

No idea about A&D 2E stats, but almost everything else is ported direct from 1E (often too direct, without even doing necessary updates for 2E), so I expect it'd work as-is.

In 2e, Demogorgon (and, coincidentally, the other demon princes and devil lords) were effectively power/gods. That meant that their stat block consisted of "you lose except in cases of plot."

However, some of the princes and lords got stat blocks in the various Planescape boxed sets, though I do not think that Demogorgon was one of them. Graz'zt, however, does. And it is a terrifying thing to behold. Dude has 41 HD to start with.

[BWR]

I can't recall any Abyssal lords getting stat blocks in the boxed sets. Or anyone of similar power.
Which lords and which supplements? because I couldn't find any on a quick browse.
Nevermind, found it.

[Rhynn]

Graz'zt is in the Planes of Chaos Monstrous Supplement, right? Not sure about any of the other ones.

I guess it's part of the 2E departure from the sword & sorcery roots of the game to turn the demon princes, evil deities, etc. from powerful monsters that the greatest heroes can fight (compare Xuthal of the Dusk, A Witch Shall be Born, The Devil in Iron, Eternal Champion, etc.) into "story-based" entities that PCs are "not supposed" to fight... although the demon princes, etc., are definitely more in the style of Corum's Lords of Chaos than Conan's monster "gods" (Zargon of B1 The Lost City is one of those).

[BWR]

Yup. He and Pazrael/Pazuzu are both there.
I used to be a strong believer in the idea that really powerful beings, like Abyssal lords and gods, should never be stat'ed, because no one should get to be that powerful and go around killing things like that. That's story, and reducing it to mere mechanics makes them into mere monsters, not actual Powers.
I've not exactly given up that idea, because for the most part I don't think that anyone, even PCs, should go around killing off absurdly powerful beings like that, but my opinion is not necessarily what others think is fun. If other people want to do that, fine. I don't really like the non-2E idea of giving stats to all the Powers, but I can always ignore it in my games. And who knows? Maybe Ill get around to having some of my players' PCs work their way towards Immortality?

[Rhynn]

There's a difference there, IMO. The original Supplement IV (and later Deities & Demigods) business of statting all gods was silly. (Paradoxically, the intro to SIV basically agrees!) But statting something like Lolth doesn't seem comparable, to me. In most settings, the gods are actually beyond mortals; they may not even exist on a similar level. But demon princes like Lolth are, to me, definitely analoguous to, say, Arioch, Mabelode, and Xiombarg from Michael Moorcock's Corum novels, and they are slain by a hero with powerful magic items. Queen of the Demonweb Pits actually generally feels a bit Moorcock to me. Graz'zt is more Arioch than Thaug or Khosatral Khel, but it's not beyond conception that the greatest heroes could slay him.

There are also games/settings where defeating gods fits in perfectly. In Glorantha, you go on HeroQuests and fight gods; or, to be precise, you take the role of a god fighting other gods. (Or tricking them, or being killed by them, or whatever.) Of course, really bad-ass Heroes then go on to fight beings of godly power as themselves. (And really world-breaking Heroes and would-be gods can actually challenge and defeat the gods themselves, as at Castle Blue, in world-shaking, once-in-an-Age events.) And, meanwhile, you can still just play a bunch of scrappy ruin-delving adventurers (who get spear-critted by trollkin) in Pavis and the Big Rubble...

[hamlet]

Well, in the early Planescape days, 2e was of the considered opinion that, while such beings could certainly be slain, they were so far beyond mortals of any stripe (even the most powerful) that we were effectively less than fleas to them if that. Basically, unless you had some monstrous plot empowered device, prophecy, or other thing going for you, you just weren't going to be able to even affect it. And if you did, well, simple combat really wasn't what was called for.

Even when they did start statting them in certain places, they tended to be very VERY dangerously powerful. So effectively "you lose" level. And even then, they don't do things like stat up Tenebrous even though you're fighting against him.

Personally, I have no particular compunctions against the idea of statting up such beings, as long as I'm free to ignore them utterly. The only being in the D&D multiverse that should never EVER be statted is The Lady of Pain. Period.

[BWR]

Well, in the early Planescape days, 2e was of the considered opinion that, while such beings could certainly be slain, they were so far beyond mortals of any stripe (even the most powerful) that we were effectively less than fleas to them if that. Basically, unless you had some monstrous plot empowered device, prophecy, or other thing going for you, you just weren't going to be able to even affect it. And if you did, well, simple combat really wasn't what was called for.

Even when they did start statting them in certain places, they tended to be very VERY dangerously powerful. So effectively "you lose" level. And even then, they don't do things like stat up Tenebrous even though you're fighting against him.

Personally, I have no particular compunctions against the idea of statting up such beings, as long as I'm free to ignore them utterly. The only being in the D&D multiverse that should never EVER be statted is The Lady of Pain. Period.

This. Especially that last bit.
If you want to fight the Big Bads, ok, but it should not just boil down to mechanics, it should be mostly story driven and there should be some unique occurance or device that allows it to happen.
I prefer my gods and Immortals beyond mortals, at least until they get to the power level themselves.

[Adanedhel]

The only being in the D&D multiverse that should never EVER be statted is The Lady of Pain. Period.
I'd add Izrador to that list. Statting out Izrador would kinda defeat the purpose of Midnight.

[hamlet]

I'd add Izrador to that list. Statting out Izrador would kinda defeat the purpose of Midnight.

I used to have the Midnight book and then ended up giving it to an interested person when I never wound up using the thing. Kind of a shame really.

Izrador is, IIRC, the big bad?

[BWR]

I'd add Izrador to that list. Statting out Izrador would kinda defeat the purpose of Midnight.

Debatable about whether it should be on the list: Midnight is third party, so not officially part of the D&D multiverse.

[Khedrac]

There are lots of things that should never have defined stats - Lord Ao and Mystaran Great Old Ones come to mind, both effectively being the 'next level up' from the gods.

And back tot he original post, I think there is a strong argument for the original AD&D version being one of the nastiest simply beause there were very few rules for countering the disease effect of his tentacles. This was probably worse in Original D&D (but I don't have the books). One of the things that weaken him in later versions is the plethora of options which mean that clever players who know what they are facing can find ways of blocking some of his naster abilities.

[GoddessSune]

The Immortals Boxed Set. As an Immortal Demogorgon was immune to all mortal attacks, unless he wished to be effected.

Otherwise...it is hard to compare. Each edition has different rules. And that is if you just go by the stuff on the page.

Demogorgon (or any monster) can be made much tougher, depending on how they are played. Often the ''who is toughest" type question gets people to assume everyone standing in a blank 10x10 room. But everything else counts.


And while it is not an ''edition'' one, I'd vote the Dicefreaks version as the toughest: http://dicefreaks.superforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2505

[Tvtyrant]

I rather like the Dicefreaks version, although I think the abilities would have worked fine without mid 70s DCs. The tail strike is a little weak IMO, even 4d4 levels lost is nothing at level 78.