Why do wizards hate sorcerers?

[Skaven]

ICly: They got awesome power for free without having to work years for it, apprenticing themselves to crotchety old men and paying a fortune to get new spells.

OOCly: Probably the same reason the sorcerer got nothing for class abilities AND got their spell level shunted back one level.

Some guy at wotc hated them.

[Winter]

Forgive me but I have no idea who General Patraeus is, I am not from US, but at the risk of sounding stupid myself unless he:

Admitting you have no idea what the example is about and then, without second thought, going on disregarding what someone else said is not what I would call a "founded opinion". You just stand on your position and claim "Because I say so!"

I fail to see the paragon, one I would use to keep the military theme

To stay in this theme but without discussing RL: Yes, I think he was considered that as far as a real being can be considered that. This is why I used him.

Also, you said he must be considered a genius. Sorry, where was Dorukan considered that? He was an epic Wizard but all the Int stat tells us he was very able to remember books.
And the point here is: Even if he was a genius, he still screwed up in a way no lowly army sergeant from Azure City worth his salt would have. It was an utterly stupid move and it was obvious it was one, but emotion and arrogance made Dorukan fail.

Smart people, even those of genius level, fail all the time. They are lazy, not informed of a specific field, arrogant. Richard Feynman was one of the smartest people in the world but he kept failing a social situations all the time (partly due to his genius, partly because he was just lazy in some regards).
Smarts are no protection from making mistakes. Which is what Doruklan learned from Colonel Xykon the hard way.

[Blue Lantern]

Admitting you have no idea what the example is about and then, without second thought, going on disregarding what someone else said is not what I would call a "founded opinion". You just stand on your position and claim "Because I say so!"

You misjudge me, I wasn't trying to disregard your paragon, but trying to estabilish a benchmark of how big I apologize if I ended up sounding offensive; and I am trying to explain my position but for some reason I do not seem to manage to.
I will try to sum it up again with a single phrase:

"There is a limit of how many and how big stupid mistakes a person can make before I can no longer consider him smart."

To stay in this theme but without discussing RL: Yes, I think he was considered that as far as a real being can be considered that. This is why I used him.

Also, you said he must be considered a genius. Sorry, where was Dorukan considered that? He was an epic Wizard but all the Int stat tells us he was very able to remember books.
And the point here is: Even if he was a genius, he still screwed up in a way no lowly army sergeant from Azure City worth his salt would have. It was an utterly stupid move and it was obvious it was one, but emotion and arrogance made Dorukan fail.

Smart people, even those of genius level, fail all the time. They are lazy, not informed of a specific field, arrogant. Richard Feynman was one of the smartest people in the world but he kept failing a social situations all the time (partly due to his genius, partly because he was just lazy in some regards).
Smarts are no protection from making mistakes. Which is what Doruklan learned from Colonel Xykon the hard way.

Excuse me, but the how you define genius, and intelligence in D&D does not govern just learning skill, it also govern logical reasoning, ability to asses and judge and the ability to plan.
Also by the rules Dorkukan had at least 19 INT (he could cast 9th level spells) and again by the rules this makes hit near the top of possible human intelligence.

Also there is a difference in failing in a field that is not your own, even for a genius, and failing at one you should be an expert into, that is also what I am trying to explain with my paragons.
For instance you say Richard Feynman failed at social situations, but as far as I know he was not a world renowed diplomat, the example I would use if he went at a conference and started fumbling basic math, in several separate occasions AND kept going on even when the results started showing him wrong.
Dorkukan was an epic wizard with an adventurer past, that means that killing things with spells and defending against dangerous opponent with spells is basically is day job, yet he did a very poor one; and I do not consider it realistic.

And since I would really have an answer to my previous question:

At this point it is I who ask you (in general), what do you consider the difference between an average person and a very smart one, and in a life and death situation, even considering pressure and emotional baggage, what do you believe are the things that the two would do differently, if the answer to that is none, then I believe there is no point in dragging this discussion further, because I think intelligence mean something more than being able to learn to perform integral calculus in your sleep.

[lio45]

He couldn't have teleported anywhere else, since then Xykon would have been able to seize the dungeon and the Gate for himself and the point of Dorukan being there at all was to ensure that that would never happen. True, the Cloister would have gone down in a month or so without Dorukan being around to cast it, but ceding the Gate to the enemy for a month so they can work on opening it with impunity is even less intelligent than trying to defend it. The way Dorukan chose to fight, retreat was not an option.

I disagree with you there. Letting the dungeon temporarily fall into Xykon's hands wouldn't have been a catastrophe -- you can see the proof in the story, Xykon's been doing long-term camping in there, sitting on that unopened Gate forever.

Escaping to live to fight another day would've been a LOT smarter than just dying there... esp. since the only argument against escaping ("can't let Xykon get the Gate") also applies directly against dying there and then... not only does the latter also lets Xykon get the Gate, but it also prevents you from putting spokes in Xykon's wheels while Xykon's figuring out how to open said Gate.

[Winter]

"There is a limit of how many and how big stupid mistakes a person can make before I can no longer consider him smart."

You could argue: in the case of Dorukan, it was one. Pretty big blunder he commited there for being emotional.
Wait a second: We know the rules of the universe state he has "lots of smarts"? Ok, then Smarts cannot be tied to "makes no mistakes".
You either claim Dorukan somehow lost 10 or even 20 points of Int or Int and "Doing stupid things" is not that related.

Excuse me, but the how you define genius

I think that does not really matter. Dorukan has lots of it, Dorukan acted stupid.

Also by the rules Dorkukan had at least 19 INT (he could cast 9th level spells) and again by the rules this makes hit near the top of possible human intelligence.

Top of human starting intelligence. Genius level is probably higher than 18 (18 + the int from levels, at least). But it still does not matter: No matter what you consider Dorukan, he was pretty smart (who cares how smart) and he made a stupid mistake out of arrogance and emotion.

Also there is a difference in failing in a field that is not your own, even for a genius, and failing at one you should be an expert into, that is also what I am trying to explain with my paragons.

I think here is were you run into the wrong direction: Real persons are no paragons, they simply do not exist. That translated to fiction as well, where the author tries to draw believable characters. Dorukan is no paragon, Rich tried to make him human. And as such, he made an emotional mistake. And died for it.
That is what makes Rich's writing in very general good, he creates good characters that are more than their Int-stat.

I also find the claim odd that every character with a high mental stat becomes an "unfailable paragon". Wuh?

For instance you say Richard Feynman failed at social situations, [...] the example I would use if he went at a conference and started fumbling basic math, in several separate occasions AND kept going on even when the results started showing him wrong.

Funny that you mention it: He just did that once. He was with all the high-tier physicis of his time and calculated something on the blackboard. Then made the "slight" mistake to forget the most important discovery of that time (the Pauli Principle) - and someone else (also nobel prize winner) too the chalk from his hand (and then they all laughed at him).
He did not make that mistake because he was stupid, but because he was too lazy to care about formal math. Smarts had nothing at all to do with that massive blunder (that today you would not make if you were in the 1st semester of quantum physics).

Dorkukan was an epic wizard with an adventurer past, that means that killing things with spells and defending against dangerous opponent with spells is basically is day job, yet he did a very poor one; and I do not consider it realistic.

That is where we differ. Your line of reasoning is the following:
"The result is impossible given what I expect from that character, therefore, the character cannot be realistic."

My line of reasoning is:
"Given what we see in the comic, what would the character have to be like (in this very situation) so it makes sense?"
As it turns out, I can just take a D&D Wizard and add emotion, arrogance and a second of bad judgment to get a well rounded character.

My characterisation is that I look at the comic and characterise the character based on that. Your's is that you have an idea how the character is supposed to be and scream "BLUNDER" when the comic does not follow what you assume.

I think you are making a horrible mistake, like someone who runs and then smashes into the wall and then blaming the wall for being there. But given that your position could be considered valid if you do not like "characters with emotion" I do not see a further use to argue.
Our differences, as I understand now, are not rooted in a wrong (or not understood) line of arguments by one side or the other or a different interpretation of what we see, but of very different and totally incompatible premises on how to read stories.

At this point it is I who ask you (in general), what do you consider the difference between an average person and a very smart one, and in a life and death situation, even considering pressure and emotional baggage, what do you believe are the things that the two would do differently, if the answer to that is none, then I believe there is no point in dragging this discussion further, because I think intelligence mean something more than being able to learn to perform integral calculus in your sleep.

I think there is none. But not because your example would support this or that, but because you misunderstand what "smart means". I explain this:
Imagine a university professor, he is very, VERY smart. He is top of his field.
You know throw him into your life and death situation.
Then there is some average Joe Soldier, who has three rounds in Afga... Gobbotopia on his back who gets thrown in the very same situation.

Both do not know this specific situation, it is new for both. Some serial killer who chops up people for fun is running at them with a knife, screaming "I just beheaded your wife! MUHAHA!"

Who do you think will handle himself better? You argue the professor, because he is much, much smarter than Joe. I argue that what happens now has nothing to do with being smart, but that Joe is going to have a much higher chance of survival.

Now you come and claim "Wait, there is experience". To that I reply "correct", but we already are not on the position anymore that "being smart" is the determining factor.

Now you are going to argue that Dorukan was BOTH experienced and smart to that I reply: Correct, but he was in a very exceptional situation that he did not encounter before.
He had an army encamped before his gates for a year. He had a lich teasing him. He had the high priest of a dark god doing whatever. They where there to do whatever he was afraid of.
He knew something they did must have done to the other gate and his gf was gone since then.
Now he learns that lich killed her. Trapped her soul. Laughed at him. Mocked him. Is it so extremely impossible to assume he made a mistake in that friction of a second he decided to "Teleport out there and smoke this punk with my epic levels"?

Especially if you consider that you are disregarding what the comic very bluntly tells you about a character (Dorukan -> Screws up) but prefer the bland rules of D&D that tell you "High Int = smart = cannot make mistakes" (they don't, but you seem to think they do).
It is up to the players/DM/author to fill those rules with colour and emotion. Rich just did that with Dorukan.

If you do not believe me: read how Rich builds characters on the left side of this website.

[veti]

The scenario you're describing is a pretty much 1:1 description of the Battle of Gettysburg, and there exist whole schools of historians dedicated to debating whether the conduct and result of that battle really has any bearing on whether Lee should be considered a military genius or not. The debate's been going for over two hundred years.

Nitpick: the Battle of Gettysburg was in 1863, so for at least the first 51 of those years the debate must have been conducted entirely by psychics...

You could try Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo, but even that was only 197 years ago.

[Math_Mage]

What exactly could he do to prepare during those months? Buff spells don't last for weeks or even days, so there's no point casting them until necessary. He had already raised his dungeon defenses as high as he could get them to go, so nothing much to do there. And I'm not sure he could have scored magic items even if he'd thought of that, since he's essentially under seige and might not have the correct crafting feats.

With months of lead time, divination, and epic magic, Dorukan could have prepared himself in pretty much any way we can imagine, and probably in several ways we can't. To answer your immediate claims: casting buff spells wasn't as important as determining which buff spells he needed to cast immediately before going into battle; raising HIS defenses (such as touch AC, or Death Ward) was more important than raising his dungeon defenses if he was planning to go out and fight; and he could have abused the loophole in Cloister to obtain magic items from elsewhere, even without speculating about crafting feats.

That's not even the point I was trying to make, though. The point is that Dorukan's error isn't some kind of emotional heat-of-the-moment failure, but an intellectual failure to properly prepare during those months for a situation he claims he was waiting for. That's why it irritates me.

[GunnDancer]

Nitpick: the Battle of Gettysburg was in 1863, so for at least the first 51 of those years the debate must have been conducted entirely by psychics...

You could try Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo, but even that was only 197 years ago.

BAHAHAHAHA!! Okay I"m glad I could post this now... I was reading these at work and your comment literally made me laugh out loud.

[ReaderAt2046]

With months of lead time, divination, and epic magic, Dorukan could have prepared himself in pretty much any way we can imagine, and probably in several ways we can't. To answer your immediate claims: casting buff spells wasn't as important as determining which buff spells he needed to cast immediately before going into battle; raising HIS defenses (such as touch AC, or Death Ward) was more important than raising his dungeon defenses if he was planning to go out and fight; and he could have abused the loophole in Cloister to obtain magic items from elsewhere, even without speculating about crafting feats.

That's not even the point I was trying to make, though. The point is that Dorukan's error isn't some kind of emotional heat-of-the-moment failure, but an intellectual failure to properly prepare during those months for a situation he claims he was waiting for. That's why it irritates me.

How exactly do you raise your touch AC while holed up in your fortress under siege? And i'm not sure Dorukan's loophole allows for summoning of objects.

I suppose my point is that nearly every kind of preperation seems to divide into 1) stuff he had probably already done while setting up his dungeon and 2) stuff that there's no point in doing until the acutal battle.

[JennTora]

How exactly do you raise your touch AC while holed up in your fortress under siege? And i'm not sure Dorukan's loophole allows for summoning of objects.

But maybe it allows for employees to be sent to buy magic items?

Also couldn't he have epically researched some epic spells to epically raise his dexterity, and epically give himself an epic deflection bonus, epically of course, while epically making said epic spell last an epic amount of time?

[Winter_Wolf]

Regarding "why do wizards hate sorcerers", I just thought of this (admittedly bad) example: Wizards are like Frank "Grimey" Grimes from the Simpsons, and sorcerers are like Homer. Grimey had to struggle for everything he got, but he kept plugging along and working hard to get where he was. Then he met Homer, who despite being, well Homer, always landed (more or less) on his feet no matter how ridiculous or illogical the situation.

Finally after having his nose rubbed in it for so long (from Grimey's point of view, but Grimey seemed kind of like the ticking-time bomb psycho anyway) he just lost his crap and flipped out on Homer who hadn't really done anything specifically wrong, except to exist in the first place.

Replace all instances of Grimey with 'wizard' and most of the Homer with 'sorcerer', and that's pretty much how it seems to me.

To pull from real world, I see a LOT of people who work hard and struggle to get what they've got, then along comes Johnny who just seems to have everything in life handed to him with no struggle. That just really pisses off a lot of people, apparently. Johnny is the sorcerer.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I think it's more like the lottery winner vs the self made millionaire. Sure there made be an edge of resentment to it, but I think a larger portion is contempt.

The businessman had to work for what he had, and as a result he understands it much better. He can keep using and growing his fortune through wise business decisions where the lottery winner will probably blow most of that money in a few years and end up just as poor as he was before.

[Math_Mage]

How exactly do you raise your touch AC while holed up in your fortress under siege? And i'm not sure Dorukan's loophole allows for summoning of objects.

I wasn't suggesting using the months of prep to raise touch AC, but to use divination (which he can cast at epic levels) to investigate Xykon and determine the sort of buffs that would be needed when he was finally ready to fight, which (as it turned out) should have included buffs to touch AC, or Death Ward. However, again, we are dealing with epic magic here, and it's entirely possible for him to gin up his AC if that's what he feels is the best use of his time (it isn't).

The loophole allows for him to acquire magic objects via summoned servants.

I suppose my point is that nearly every kind of preperation seems to divide into 1) stuff he had probably already done while setting up his dungeon and 2) stuff that there's no point in doing until the acutal battle.

There's also
3) stuff that should be done just before going into battle;
4) stuff that should be done to determine what to do before and in battle;
5) layers of long-term personal protection that wouldn't be relevant while setting up the dungeon, but would be relevant to a magic duel;
etc.

The main point is that Dorukan did a bad job of not only 2), which can be written off as emotions overcoming wits, but also 4), where his wits have had months to assert themselves.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Wouldn't severe overconfidence leading to an epic level wizard badly underestimating a sorcerer to the point where he felt comfortable in his ability to destroy him half-cocked fall under the category of low wisdom not intelligence?

[Blue Lantern]

You could argue: in the case of Dorukan, it was one. Pretty big blunder he commited there for being emotional.
Wait a second: We know the rules of the universe state he has "lots of smarts"? Ok, then Smarts cannot be tied to "makes no mistakes".
You either claim Dorukan somehow lost 10 or even 20 points of Int or Int and "Doing stupid things" is not that related.

Actually I argue:
1) It was more than one, it was at least five one after another, each one big in his own way:

To put it more clearly (hopefully) SoD spoilers

Spoiler

Show

1) He got goaded into a fight in an unfavorable position because of an emoctional reaction - Stupid mistake but acceptable.
2) He threw himself in the fight without any protection despite having the time to get some - hard to swallow but ok.
3) He spent an year being besieged and apparently not doing much to prepare himself if not putting up some defences in the dungeon - at this point my theet starts to cringe.
4) Fighting without any appreciable strategy, without any protactions nor contingecies (and I don't mean the spell) and with, frankly, not particularly good tactics - my head shakes, we are pushing the boundaries of credibility.
5) When the fight started going extremely badly for him he stood still, did nothing, and got killed - At this point we are past any justification.

2) With all those mistake I have difficultuies considering him smart.
3) Him being not smart clashes with the supposed rules of the setting in which the story takes place.

I think that does not really matter. Dorukan has lots of it, Dorukan acted stupid.
Top of human starting intelligence. Genius level is probably higher than 18 (18 + the int from levels, at least). But it still does not matter: No matter what you consider Dorukan, he was pretty smart (who cares how smart) and he made a stupid mistake out of arrogance and emotion.

Actually it does matter since it is the very base around this entire discussion, if Dorkukan had a lot of INT then I would like to know your definition of intelligence that allows him to make all the stupid things he made (again, more than one) and still be considered smart.
If you want to consider intelligence just the ability to learn new stuff, fine, it would in fact solve the issue entirely, but either in D&D and in real life that is only one aspect of intelligence, there is also cunning, reasoning, logic, planning abilities, all things that Dorkukan had not showed at all.

I think here is were you run into the wrong direction: Real persons are no paragons, they simply do not exist. That translated to fiction as well, where the author tries to draw believable characters. Dorukan is no paragon, Rich tried to make him human. And as such, he made an emotional mistake. And died for it.
That is what makes Rich's writing in very general good, he creates good characters that are more than their Int-stat.

I used the wrong term there, I did not mean paragon as a "model of excellence" but as a synonym of example, it is so in my language and I forgot to correct.

I also find the claim odd that every character with a high mental stat becomes an "unfailable paragon". Wuh?

Hun? When exactly would I have said that?

Funny that you mention it: He just did that once. He was with all the high-tier physicis of his time and calculated something on the blackboard. Then made the "slight" mistake to forget the most important discovery of that time (the Pauli Principle) - and someone else (also nobel prize winner) too the chalk from his hand (and then they all laughed at him).
He did not make that mistake because he was stupid, but because he was too lazy to care about formal math. Smarts had nothing at all to do with that massive blunder (that today you would not make if you were in the 1st semester of quantum physics).

Ok, and what did he do after that? Did he kept doing the mistake again? And by basic math I did not mean did he not take into account a recenty (at the time) discovered principle, but he put a 2+2=5 (for sufficiently small amount of 2) in an equation that lead in a result that he should have known it was wrong whitout correctin himself; because that is the magniture of the mistake I see Dorkukan doing.

That is where we differ. Your line of reasoning is the following:
"The result is impossible given what I expect from that character, therefore, the character cannot be realistic."

My line of reasoning is:
"Given what we see in the comic, what would the character have to be like (in this very situation) so it makes sense?"
As it turns out, I can just take a D&D Wizard and add emotion, arrogance and a second of bad judgment to get a well rounded character.

My characterisation is that I look at the comic and characterise the character based on that. Your's is that you have an idea how the character is supposed to be and scream "BLUNDER" when the comic does not follow what you assume.

I think you are making a horrible mistake, like someone who runs and then smashes into the wall and then blaming the wall for being there. But given that your position could be considered valid if you do not like "characters with emotion" I do not see a further use to argue.
Our differences, as I understand now, are not rooted in a wrong (or not understood) line of arguments by one side or the other or a different interpretation of what we see, but of very different and totally incompatible premises on how to read stories.

If you create or use a framework in which your characters act that has a certain set of rules it is expected that those rules should be followed, or at least it should be given an explanation when they are not.

Well glad there is someone so bright and knowledgeable about storymaking a interpretation.
My line of reasoning is that I look at the character in a story, look at how things are supposed to work within the framework that story uses, and if there is any unexplaied or unacknowledged discrepancy between the two I took notice.

Now what you seems to argue is that if a story is enjoiable and believable enough it does not matter if it has internal consistency, I agree with that, but I add that a story that is enjoiable and believable but has internal consistency is superior.

I think there is none. But not because your example would support this or that, but because you misunderstand what "smart means". I explain this:
Imagine a university professor, he is very, VERY smart. He is top of his field.
You know throw him into your life and death situation.
Then there is some average Joe Soldier, who has three rounds in Afga... Gobbotopia on his back who gets thrown in the very same situation.

Both do not know this specific situation, it is new for both. Some serial killer who chops up people for fun is running at them with a knife, screaming "I just beheaded your wife! MUHAHA!"

Who do you think will handle himself better? You argue the professor, because he is much, much smarter than Joe. I argue that what happens now has nothing to do with being smart, but that Joe is going to have a much higher chance of survival.

I would not claim such a thing, I really don't know if you don't understand my argument or are misinterpreting it on purpose, what I would claim is that the university professor in that situation should not do something so obviously and monumentally stupid like throwing himself against the killer barehanded and after recieving a non fatal knife wound staying there being gutted, intead of chosing a more sensible course of action like running or hiding. Would that make a difference in the long run? Not likely, but one is more consistent with a "smart" person that the other.

Now you are going to argue that Dorukan was BOTH experienced and smart to that I reply: Correct, but he was in a very exceptional situation that he did not encounter before.
He had an army encamped before his gates for a year. He had a lich teasing him. He had the high priest of a dark god doing whatever. They where there to do whatever he was afraid of.
He knew something they did must have done to the other gate and his gf was gone since then.
Now he learns that lich killed her. Trapped her soul. Laughed at him. Mocked him. Is it so extremely impossible to assume he made a mistake in that friction of a second he decided to "Teleport out there and smoke this punk with my epic levels"?

Especially if you consider that you are disregarding what the comic very bluntly tells you about a character (Dorukan -> Screws up) but prefer the bland rules of D&D that tell you "High Int = smart = cannot make mistakes" (they don't, but you seem to think they do).
It is up to the players/DM/author to fill those rules with colour and emotion. Rich just did that with Dorukan.

If you do not believe me: read how Rich builds characters on the left side of this website.

1) Again I never said that, can you please stop putting word in my mouth and start reading the entirety of my argument, so maybe we could actually move forward in the discussion.

Yes and the problem of that point is that Dorkukan being goaded into the fight does not justify at all the fact that he acted like a moron.

I am not arguing that a Wizard with high intelligence should always use the best possible strategy, but that they should at least avoid action that a 5 year old would find stupid.

Again, for the third time, I am not arguing smart people should never do any mistake, is the sheer magnitude of the stupid acts committed that I have trouble accepting.

2) Dorkukan did not act in the spur of a second, he actually employed amost 30 second before his first strike, also even assuming it was a situation he did not encounter before he had one year to think of a strategy, who apparently amounted to nothing. And considering that he knew (as you aknowleged) about Lirian demise and knew or suspected that it was at the hand of the same enemy at his doorstep it puts an even bigger dent in his supposed strategy, or lack thereof.

3) I am not disregarding what the comics talls, I am disagreeing with it because it runs contrary to the supposed rules the comic itself is supposed to follow.

Also Roy screwed up when facing Xykon at Azure City, Varsavius screwed up when fighting Xykon during the soul splice, yet I have no problem believing they have a decent intelligence score, because within the limits of their errors they still acted with a reasonale amount of competence, and that does not mean they did the best possible choice but that did not made action obviously stupid, AND tried to fall back when realized their plans were not working.
The reason Dorkukan fights bugs me (especially at the time I read it) is because it would have taken so little to make it one of the most epic of the entire story and cemented Xykon as a really big villain. Instead is an entirely plot hammered event that, at that point, undermined his very phylosophy about power.

That's not even the point I was trying to make, though. The point is that Dorukan's error isn't some kind of emotional heat-of-the-moment failure, but an intellectual failure to properly prepare during those months for a situation he claims he was waiting for. That's why it irritates me.

Thank you, that is exacltly one of the points I was trying to make, but you did it much more clearly.

Wouldn't severe overconfidence leading to an epic level wizard badly underestimating a sorcerer to the point where he felt comfortable in his ability to destroy him half-cocked fall under the category of low wisdom not intelligence?

As I see it:

Wisdom is hindsight, Intelligence is Cunning, low wisdom explains his underestimating the enemy and getting goaded. Throwing himself in the fight without protection, having spent almost an year in preparations that did not result in any noticeable advantage, and using extremely poor tactics is the mark of a low intelligence.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Okay, how about this? Maybe he did spend a year planning the perfect fight but Xykon's threat that drew him out was more effective than he let on. Maybe he decided that if he spent a minute or two casting all the buffs he planned on on himself (or even spending eight hours preparing all the correct buffs for the fight) would let Xykon follow through on that threat.

Just maybe low wisdom (and wizard arrogance regarding sorcerers) told him that acting now and skipping all that preparation work would both save the body and let him triumph over the stupid sorcerer with an acceptable chance of success. (And to be fair he would have been almost correct in that, as indicated it was a very close fight.)

As for not running away or fighting back, that's the sort of behavior you'd expect out of something with, like 2 intelligence, so obviously there has to be something going on here. So, how about this? The first energy drain was a doozy. Let's say the first energy drain he got hit with was a maximum damage crit that knocked sixteen levels off him and all the other ones were minimum rolls that drained two. He could have been knocked straight down to level 7 at minimum and losing nearly every spell he were relying on to fight the battle is just the sort of thing that might make him lose a round while he tries to figure out what the heck he's even going to do next. It would also remove the ability to cast any sort of escape spell except Dimension Door (which he might not have had prepared in favor of things like Greater Teleport). And after that he might have realized that it was hopeless, what is he going to do, fire a few magic missiles at Xykon?

I don't think it was intended that way, of course, but I think it's a more realistic explanation than him being literally as smart as a deer caught in the headlights.

[ti'esar]

To be honest, I think Xykon's point winds up undercut no matter what. Whether you believe he was justified in it or not, Dorukan did act fairly stupidly, and while that nicely sets up the conclusion of the running wizards-underestimating-sorcerers theme, it also means that the big "with enough power, who needs tactics" speech is really more like "with enough power, and with your opponent making big mistakes, who needs tactics".

[VanIsleKnight]

Alright, has the battle itself been detailed somewhere that I'm not aware of? Because I really would like to see the fight between Xykon and Dorukan, that would be freakin' awesome to watch. :D

If it's not though, then why are people saying that Dorukan was stupid?

[Kish]

Alright, has the battle itself been detailed somewhere that I'm not aware of?

Start of Darkness.

[King of Nowhere]

To be honest, I think Xykon's point winds up undercut no matter what. Whether you believe he was justified in it or not, Dorukan did act fairly stupidly, and while that nicely sets up the conclusion of the running wizards-underestimating-sorcerers theme, it also means that the big "with enough power, who needs tactics" speech is really more like "with enough power, and with your opponent making big mistakes, who needs tactics".

but what xykon said is true no matter what.
for example, in every strategic game there's a point where the enemy has so big an army that he can just throw it all at you and you can do nothing to stop it. Or in any rpg, a point where just doing basic attacks every turn is going to accomplish the task. In cryptography you can think of "brute force" as maybe "trying all possible combination with enough computational power" and that is also going to work eventually. And throwing a special kind of experimental brute force at a problem is what combinatorial chemistry is about - automated analysis of tens of thouands of different potential medicines until you find one that works. The examples are endless

So, in the case of xykon vs dorukan, dorukan using bad strategy certainly lowered the power treeshold needed for xykon to best him. maybe people would have been more satisfied if xykon had just cast a dispel on him first; that would not have changed the point of the fight and would have avoided all the angst some people are throwing at it.

[Clistenes]

So, in the case of xykon vs dorukan, dorukan using bad strategy certainly lowered the power treeshold needed for xykon to best him. maybe people would have been more satisfied if xykon had just cast a dispel on him first; that would not have changed the point of the fight and would have avoided all the angst some people are throwing at it.

A single casting of Superb Dispel (Xykon's own epic spell) would have fixed all the problems we are discussing here.

[Blue Lantern]

but what xykon said is true no matter what.
for example, in every strategic game there's a point where the enemy has so big an army that he can just throw it all at you and you can do nothing to stop it. Or in any rpg, a point where just doing basic attacks every turn is going to accomplish the task. In cryptography you can think of "brute force" as maybe "trying all possible combination with enough computational power" and that is also going to work eventually. And throwing a special kind of experimental brute force at a problem is what combinatorial chemistry is about - automated analysis of tens of thouands of different potential medicines until you find one that works. The examples are endless

That may be true in theory, but in practice the brute force approach is considered one of the weakest way of problem solving because the power and time requirements makes it highly impractical, and it is usually used only when there is no other way known, or for a problem either much simpler or not particularly urgent where there is no desire to consume resources to find a better ways, an that only if the brute force can be painlessly automated.
Even in war, where having superior firepower is a good thing, there are numerous example of battles won against superior forces by the use of extremely good tactics, Cannae and Azincourt comes to mind, and having a military force so big that you can completely forget about tactics and strategy is something that, to my knowledge at least, has never been considered a realistic approach to warfare.
If Xykon had the kind of overwhelming power that could have won the battle indipendently from any strategy from Dorkukan he SoD spoiler

Spoiler

Show

could have avoided waiting for an entire year and just steamrolled the wizard defenses.

So, in the case of xykon vs dorukan, dorukan using bad strategy certainly lowered the power treeshold needed for xykon to best him. maybe people would have been more satisfied if xykon had just cast a dispel on him first; that would not have changed the point of the fight and would have avoided all the angst some people are throwing at it.

A single casting of Superb Dispel (Xykon's own epic spell) would have fixed all the problems we are discussing here.

No it wouldn't, arguably it would make thing worse, even if showing a dispel would have meant that Dorkukan has made some preparation, which would not have included preparations against dispelling itself, it would also make his battle action even stupider.
The point is, as long as his buff are in effect his continuing the fight might be overconfidence, that could, almost, be attributed to low wisdom, at least to a point, continuing the battle even after having your buff removed is suicidal overconfidence at the 11th degree, and lot less excusable.

[Clistenes]

No it wouldn't, arguably it would make thing worse, even if showing a dispel would have meant that Dorkukan has made some preparation, which would not have included preparations against dispelling itself, it would also make his battle action even stupider.

Superb Dispel is an epic spell, and it's very difficult to counter that. Even if Dorukan had an anti-dispelling epic spell he still would have to make a casting check.

The point is, as long as his buff are in effect his continuing the fight might be overconfidence, that could, almost, be attributed to low wisdom, at least to a point, continuing the battle even after having your buff removed is suicidal overconfidence at the 11th degree, and lot less excusable.

Spoiler

Show

Well, once he had no defenses the first Energy Drain spell could have lowered his level enough that he lost all his prepared "emergency exit spells" (say quickened Teleport, Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Teleport or Plane Shift; if Dorukan lost 8 levels he could very well be unable to cast them), and the Superb Dispel could have destroyed or rended useless any magical item or contingencies he could have prepared in order to escape if he lost

[Blue Lantern]

Superb Dispel is an epic spell, and it's very difficult to counter that. Even if Dorukan had an anti-dispelling epic spell he still would have to make a casting check.

Yes, but it does not prevents you from casting other spells.

Spoiler

Show

And loosing all his buffs and items except flight seems a bit of a stretch

Spoiler

Show

Well, once he had no defenses the first Energy Drain spell could have lowered his level enough that he lost all his prepared "emergency exit spells" (say quickened Teleport, Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Teleport or Plane Shift; if Dorukan lost 8 levels he could very well be unable to cast them), and the Superb Dispel could have destroyed or rended useless any magical item or contingencies he could have prepared in order to escape if he lost

Spoiler

Show

That's not how negative levels works, you lose one spell prepared of the highest level you have, we see him cast 2 9th level spell and 2 7th level spells (assuming he casted greater teleport ), plus a couple of unidentified ones (his first attack, and the jet of flames). Even assuming he used all his spell slots of 7th levels of higher, including his epic ones, (and if that was true and his enemy was still standing he should have seriously consider retreating, because what he could have remaining was hardly able to have better results) and assuming the first energy drain hit for max he should still have available all spells from 1th to 4th level, among them there are expeditious retreat, invisibility, mirror image, displacement, dimension door, etc. all could have been useful as a last ditch defense and escape strategy, especially considering that by that level those slots are hardly useful for offensive spells.

[Clistenes]

Yes, but it does not prevents you from casting other spells.

Spoiler

Show

And loosing all his buffs and items except flight seems a bit of a stretch

Spoiler

Show

I'm not saying Xykon casted Superb Dispel, I'm saying that, if he had done that, the fight would have made sense.

Spoiler

Show

That's not how negative levels works, you lose one spell prepared of the highest level you have, we see him cast 2 9th level spell and 2 7th level spells (assuming he casted greater teleport ), plus a couple of unidentified ones (his first attack, and the jet of flames). Even assuming he used all his spell slots of 7th levels of higher, including his epic ones, (and if that was true and his enemy was still standing he should have seriously consider retreating, because what he could have remaining was hardly able to have better results) and assuming the first energy drain hit for max he should still have available all spells from 1th to 4th level, among them there are expeditious retreat, invisibility, mirror image, displacement, dimension door, etc. all could have been useful as a last ditch defense and escape strategy, especially considering that by that level those slots are hardly useful for offensive spells.

Spoiler

Show

Again, I'm not saying Xykon casted Superb Dispel, I'm saying that, if he had done that, and Dorukan's "emergency escape" spell were a quickened teleport (9th level spell), or a quickened greater teleport (12th level), or a Silent Still Plane Shift (9th spell level), Dorukan could have lost it after suffering the Energy Drain, being unable to escape. The spells we see Dorukan cast are irrelevant, since I'm speaking of an hypothetical fight were Dorukan fought more cleverly

[Blue Lantern]

Spoiler

Show

Yes but in your hypothetical scenario, what does he used his lower spells slots for?

[Clistenes]

Spoiler

Show

Yes but in your hypothetical scenario, what does he used his lower spells slots for?

Spoiler

Show

If he had prepared invisibility, or even Dimension Door, or even Mirror Image, he would have a chance to escape. If not, he would have been able to cast a couple more spells before being killed

[Koo Rehtorb]

Also, again, Energy Drain can crit, which could theoretically remove up to sixteen levels.

[Scowling Dragon]

I would have tied my death to the gate. So if I died (Of Unnatural causes, or heck since as a wizard Im pretty sure I have the right to make up my own spells I would make it that it monitors the danger levels.) I would have the gate and the whole castle explode in a massive explosion (5 minutes after I died). Killing/ Destroying everything in a two mile radius.

[King of Nowhere]

That may be true in theory, but in practice the brute force approach is considered one of the weakest way of problem solving because the power and time requirements makes it highly impractical.

Yes, true. brute force is generally not the best solution, however it is a solution that works for almost everything if you can gather the resources necessary.

I would have tied my death to the gate. So if I died (Of Unnatural causes, or heck since as a wizard Im pretty sure I have the right to make up my own spells I would make it that it monitors the danger levels.) I would have the gate and the whole castle explode in a massive explosion (5 minutes after I died). Killing/ Destroying everything in a two mile radius.

That would have included killing ccelia and her coworkers and a bunch of other innocent creatures likely, and was unlikely to harm anyone that had the power to kill dorukan.
What I would have done would have been to set a message to all the other defenders of the gates to inform them of what happened to me, so that they would have had some information on the nature of the threath to the gates.

But we are way off topic from the discussion, which was already off topic from the argument of the thread. Unfortunately, it seems you can't mention wizards and sorcerors in this forum without the discussion being soon deranged on a dorukan vs xykon argument.