Talk:Demogorgon

Why is this monster's base level listed as 50? For every other monster I can find, the value listed in monst.c as the 3rd parameter corresponds to the base level. See monst.c#line2731 for Demogorgon's stats. Is there something in the game that sets values over 50 to 50? Addps4cat 17:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Answered my own question, see makemon.c#line923. Addps4cat 20:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Killing demogorgon

It's possible to decapitate him with vorpal blade, which is probably more viable than beating him to death.

Expanded article with an eye towards the noobs.

Okay, I fleshed this article out with strategy ideas and some material on the implications of Demogorgon's powers of sickness and pursuit. Some of this stuff was already in there--for example, his powers are clearly listed in the stats box--but my intent was to connect the dots a little better for the moderately-experienced player who may never have had to work through the implications of everything before meeting Demogorgon (like, well, me until just recently). It could certainly use some prettying up, but I would request future editors to look at this from the point of view of someone who doesn't already know how to tackle the big D. There's a place for terseness and a place for making things more explicit. Thanks!--Ckbryant 22:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Taming

Can Demogorgon and/or other demon princes be tamed? Are they vulnerable to level drain? How could I determine this from the page (article on Death Rider says that he is immune but its not listed under resistances or anything)? DemonDoll 19:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Most things can be tamed if you level drain them enough--Famine and Pestilence, for instance. Demogorgon? Don't know. It would be a most interesting thing for you to research, perhaps by starting a game in Wizard Mode as a wizard character, wishing up spellbooks of Drain Life and Taming, setting your XL to 30, and creating Demogorgon via the create monster command. I'd be interested in hearing your findings. --Ckbryant 23:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Even the Wizard can be level drained, so why not. DemonDoll, I'd be interested in hearing of your results. -Tjr 15:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

uhmm, seems no if I read the source correctly: Drain_resistance#Acquiring_drain_resistance. -Tjr 21:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty certain that Demogorgon cannot be tamed not just because he cannot be level drained, but more importantly he is Covetous (wants the amulet), and anything Covetous cannot be tamed in that form. (ie. to get a pet Arch Lich, you need to raise one from a Demilich).

However, in SLASH'EM it is a very different story. Did it today. However, it seems to only be useful as a Silly Ascension Trick. Pets do not cast offensive spells, and it seems monsters other than yourself have a natural immunity to sickness. All this leaves is level drain, stunning and rather low amounts of damage. - MrFroon 06:24, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Wizard mode testing confirms Demogorgon is completely untameable. This was done on a non-teleport level with a magic trap because it ignores magic resistance. -Tjr 02:27, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Did you imply I was lying? I hate it when that happens, as now I need to defend myself...

"You cannot tame Demogorgon in NetHack, however in SLASH'EM you can have Demogorgon as a pet." Due to Demogorgon having the property "M3_WANTSAMUL", he, like all covetous monsters, cannot to tamed in that form. However in SLASH'EM there is an exploit that allows a monster to change to another form and eventually change back.

That Wizard Mode test was flawed, repeating the experiment using an Arch Lich instead of Demogorgon would yield the same result, yet pet Arch Liches are well documented. (I am curious if any major demon, say a marilith, would be tamed this way, the wiki claims that major demons can only be tamed when the player is polymorphed into a demon, I don't have access to wizard mode, so I don't know.)

Evidence. I took a screenshot, granted any image can be faked, but in any case:

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/6299/demopet.png

Finally, a repeatable experiment which should yield the same result repeatedly. As I mentioned earlier I do not have access to Wizard Mode, so this is a bit of a guess. In SLASH'EM Wizard Mode, summon Demogorgon, polymorph yourself into a Genetic Engineer, hit Demogorgon, if you can tame the result do so, if not hit him again and then tame. Reverse genocide or summon in some enemies that could kill the pet (I used conflict and blue jellies in my game, he was a 800hp cave spider). Note what happens when the pet that once was Demogorgon dies.

I could probably find the TTYrecs of my play if you require further evidence, was playing on Pallas (slashem.crash-override.net) under the username "SandraWinn".- MrFroon 20:57, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

You are perfectly correct about the Demogorgon (and Death, ...) in SLASH'EM. Perhaps I should be more clear: Monsters in Demogorgon or arch-lich form are completely untameable. (I do not know about shapechangers in Demogorgon form.) That does not preclude already tamed monsters becoming arch-liches. As a side note, you can often hear the "human or elf" extended structure excludes the "pet" extended monster structure, which is why @ are untameable. The guardian angel you get on Astral Plane is tame, and does not have the pet extended structure. -Tjr 14:01, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Jousting Demogorgon

Tried it in wizard mode, using believable equipment and stats. -25 AC, 25 str from GoP, +7 lance, expert in lance and riding, max luck, riding a Ki-rin. The first hit was not a joust, so he teleported away, waited a few turns, then attacked and made me sick. I was able to joust him, but he got away after that because my next attack wasn't a joust. Third time was the charm, and I jousted him repeatedly until he died. Took about 6-8 hits, so I estimate a ~25% chance of being able to kill him in any given chance if you can do enough damage. Failing a single joust should give him enough time to escape, unless you're riding a fast warhorse (I'm no expert on riding, or even speed, so I could be wrong). However even if he does escape you'll have plenty of time to apply your unicorn horn and fix the illness. Drain life can be easily prevented with MC3, his worst spells will be stopped by MR, and his regular attacks are actually fairly lackluster. -- Qazmlpok 21:26, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Once you can get that kind of gear, can't you just stand on the stairs up, burn Elbereth / drop scare monster, and beat him with a sock? Tjr 16:18, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Of course. For the most part, I don't even use the sock; most of the time I've encountered him I just wait for him to summon a black dragon and wait for him to get disintegrated. Isn't a player going to have this level of gear by the time they encounter Demogorgon? I'm pretty sure the only way you could encounter Demogorgon before Gehennom is from Yeenoghu or Juiblex, and those two are already extremely rare outside of Gehennom. The level of gear I mentioned is actually worse than what I normally have when I enter Gehennom, although I also tend to over-prepare. -- Qazmlpok 16:39, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Underwater

I was on Demogorgon's Slashem level and was about to die. I jumped into the water (I am wearing gauntlets of swimming). Demogorgon will teleport next to you while you are underwater but he did not ever attack. This gives you the opportunity to attack Demogorgon yet he will notattack you. He will teleport away as usual after you attack him.Ndwolfwood 22:39, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Monster movement, terrain type, conflict/confusion, and monster attacks have a lot of wierd interactions. Somebody knowledgeable should really write a manual. See this thread for a partial answer: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.roguelike.nethack/browse_thread/thread/1f25b623b992c316/7982fe53c7943f90#7982fe53c7943f90 --Tjr

Teleporting Demogorgon

In SLASH'EM, it's seems to be impossible to teleport Demogorgon away (tried with wand of teleportation) in his lair. Why? High MR or something like this? --S.K.

All covetous monsters effectively neutralize teleportation. Demogorgon doesn't resist teleportation, it's just that every turn he warps next to you. If you teleport him and get another turn before he gets one he'll stay gone for that turn. But it's still useless as he'll just come right back on his turn and attack you. -- Qazmlpok 23:57, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Scroll of Scare Monster

"A scroll of scare monster in a container is very helpful." I would just like to point out that it is even more helpful out of the container and under your feet. But I guess it would just be pedantic to add that to the text. Thoughts? Wikid (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

The implication (from my understanding) is that you #tip it out and thus not risk it being cursed, which would otherwise instadust it when you try to pick it back up. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 06:05, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

That's true in the era of the #tip command, although I'm pretty sure this spoiler has been around even longer :) PS appreciate your editing energy! Wikid (talk) 07:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

No prob!

Prior to #tipping, I think they'd take the somewhat riskier action of looting it from the container prior to dropping it (and thus opening it to risk of cursing among other things). Just a guess, mostly. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 07:23, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Umbire the Phantom Rewrite Project

How much of a rewrite does this page really need? Some of this text has been around for long enough to create a sentimental attachment. For example the following goes back to Wikihack days, although not as far as Dylan O'Donnell's spoiler.

Conversely, if you want to meet Demogorgon, perhaps as the ultimate demonstration of your demon-hunting prowess, then take precautions against Orcus' wand of death and let him spend all the time he wants ineffectively zapping you with it. Demogorgon will be along eventually.

Did it really have to go?

Wikid (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think "sentimental attachment" is enough justification to keep slightly fluffy phrasing, especially if a better wording is possible. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I'll put it another way. You're fixing something that isn't broken. Please take a break from your activities pending a consensus from other editors. Wikid (talk) 02:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Considering the amount of information that could easily have been communicated with less text and the lack of sectioning, I highly doubt "isn't broken" is an applicable phrase here - even if we somehow ignore one very basic tenet of a wiki ("If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here"), it's one thing to get attached to particular phrasings, and quite another to try and suggest than an editor take a step back from correcting problems with an article solely because you didn't see them as problems to begin with. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 02:50, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

You remind me of a fellow by the name of Magicbymccauley, who did a lot of work here for a while, and had some creative ideas about Universal, Broad, and Narrow artifacts. Keep it up Wikid (talk) 03:05, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Cool beans, don't see the relevance. I mean, beyond the obvious implication that I'm somehow objectively worsening the quality of articles by... breaking up paragraphs and trimming them to retain the same information with more readability and less text??? Because last I checked, that was the opposite of what ol' McCauley pulled. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 03:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

You've got a point there, McCauley specialised in verbiage. But he / she / they didn't warm to "merciless editing" either. The text "Demogorgon will be along eventually" came in with Ckbryant's Revision as of 17:09, 24 January 2008. It said "Conversely, if you want to meet Demogorgon, perhaps as the ultimate demonstration of your demon-hunting prowess, then let Orcus spend all the time he wants bouncing death rays off of your shield of reflection. Demogorgon will be along eventually." That writing was entertaining, and it served for more than a decade. Were you on the wiki in 2008? It doesn't matter if you can say the same in less words. You've just removed some of the quirkiness that gave this place its appeal. Wikid (talk) 03:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

"It went unchanged for 10+ years" is not a valid argument. Try again. I also doubt this wiki's qualities will languish for lack of a single line, especially in terms of quirkiness. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Also, singular "they" suffices when referring to someone whose gender isn't known to you. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Fine. Wikid (talk) 03:50, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Just so as not to leave you two feeling you're all alone, a third-party opinion. I'm glad to see both of you are concerned with the editorial quality of the wiki. I've been watching some of Umbire's edits for a while, and while I don't agree with every single word, I have to say they're a competent editor, something lots of pages have been in need of for a long time. I also empathize with the nostalgia, though, and understand that some nice things get lost in editing, especially in the context of a very tradition-filled pastime like Nethack. These two things said, on the one side and the other, I would like to encourage Wikid to take the broad view and be glad the overall quality is going upwards, and I would like to encourage Umbire to be tolerant here and there of the non-encyclopedic, we're-all-in-it-for-fun tone that often pops up in this particular wiki. Netzhack (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Netzhack :) Wikid (talk) 08:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

While I'm glad you can at least intuit my perspective, I'm still annoyed at this idea that I must necessarily be intolerant against any kind of whimsical or non-encyclopedic phrasing within a given article - in terms of phrasing something to be understandable to the average reader, I just go with what reads better to me personally. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 08:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm also annoyed by the fact that I could probably think of five other 'quirkier' phrases that I've left intact or else written in myself. --Umbire the Phantom (talk) 08:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Oops, I should have written "more tolerant". Sorry to have caused annoyance -- the opposite was my intention. Netzhack (talk) 10:57, 17 February 2020 (UTC)