Who would win? in my opinion, it probs be the Dragon, burn that over grown serpant to a crisp :twisted:

 

I would say the basilisk - the basilisk's glare should still work on the dragon as a dragons eyes are vunerable.
Plus, the wizarding world seems to be far more fearful of basilisks than dragons.

 

I say Fawkes...

Fawkes owns all.

 

I'd have to say that a dragon would win.. Imean the dam things can fly out of the basilisk's stikeing range. AS far as the basilisk eyes go it would only work if the dragon were to look directly into it's eyes.

 

I say that sometimes its the dragon and sometimes its the basilisk with the odds favoring the basilisk.

 

If the stare works, basilisk. If memory serves basilisks are considered the second most deadly creatures. But that's deadly to humans.

Rooster vs. Basilisk.

How's that for a seriously weak achilles heel?

 

Yeah but how many roosters will cry on command? You've gotta be pretty lucky for the rooster to cry at the right moment.

 

I vote for the basilisk. Death Glare > Fire

 

I gotta lean towards the dragon now, because Fawkes was clearly unaffected by the glare.

I think to humans a basilisk is still more dangerous than dragon, but the flight and the fire versus just a big arse snake, seems to favor the dragon.

And what would you think a rooster would do seeing a basilisk? Squawk in fright, just as the basilisk turns tail and runs away scared. As they are known to "flee" from roosters. Course that means they stand up proud and tall to the dragons. But with a mortal enemy of spiders, again, comes off a bit wussy.

 

I say Dragon, my guess is the glare only works on weak minded creatures... aka Humans.


/Myst

 

Spiders flee before the basilisk. A rooster's crow is lethal to it. They can live for thousands of years (apparently from just rats). I'd say that the rooster is the only thing the basilisk is afraid of, if only for its cry. Were I a basilisk, I'd just try to squish the rooster before it crows. It is still debatable about whether or not the glare works on dragons, I don't know. If it does, the basilisk would win. Otherwise, the dragon.

 

Well, Dragons are powerfully magical creatures in their own right; and all we know is that the Basilisk's glare works on Humans, and magically week creatures (Mrs Norris is probably part Kneasle). I would have to say that the Dragon would come out on top, because it can attack from a distance, while the Basilisk would need to get right up close to its prey.

 

I figure the Dragon would win. It has height+fire. It doesn't necessarily need to look at the Basilisk's eyes, and can flame it.

 

I'll say Basilisk due to the fact that a dragon would have to atleast be within a certain distance to let the flame go, and as the flame would loose heat the farther away it is, who's to say that it will even effect the Basilisk's hide? Take into acount that a snake that size would have an incredible stiking speed not to mention reach, it need only make contact with its venom to render the Dragon usless. What about terrain, room to move, cover, water etc.?

 

Definetly Dragon. The Death Glare is potent but the dragon is also a magical creature that is resistant to almost all spell. That means it may be resistant to death glares as well (Save vs. Death). The only other weapon a Basilisk has is it's poisionous bite which mean getting close to a dragon after slithering through fire breath. In close range the Dragon has teeth, claws and a sharp, flexible tail.

Dragon when faced with a Basilisk: Can I have fries with this

 

How about,, would you like that orignal or extra crispy?
and for the Basilisk lovers (coughGinnyCough) out there: Would you like that with one fang ore two?

 

Basilisk would win vs a HP Dragon. People saying a dragon would be as resistant to the death glare as Fawkes forget that Fawkes also "survived" the killing curse from one of the most powerful Dark wizards ever, whereas the dragons in GoF were blinded (Krum), put into a trance (Fleur), and outsmarted (Cedric & Harry) by three 17 year olds and a 14 year old.

D&D/LOTR/Other Mythical Dragons would probably be able to beat a basilisk though, since they aren't just stupid animals that can breathe fire like in HP.

 

Good point, I agree with the above post

 

Don't forget that dragons are knocked out by 8 stunners - Basilisks are feared for a reason, not just their death glare. On a side note would Snape's animagus be a basilisk because of his death glare?
Also there are snakes, and even spiders, that eat birds - and dragons are just a highly evolved bird really. As for the mortal enemy beings spiders - Did you see the size of that thing in CoS? It was bloody well huge! With very potent poison I believe. Spiders are the most common phobia among humans so it being an enemy of a bloody, great snake ain't to far fetched. They are also 3 of the top ten most venomous animals on earth - nothing to laugh at I assure you. (Can you tell I'm an arachnaphobe yet?)
I vote basilisk, cause it has an enormous striking range, the most lethal poison in the Wizarding Worldand would probably be super fast (like King Cobra fast) to have been feared throughout history. Dragons may be able to fly, but basilisks can kill on sight (just think of the possibilities! ) and I doubt dragons would be immune to it - if they can be felled by a few stunners a powerful magical creature with death sight is in a whole different league.

Hope my response isn't as rambling as I think but oh well.
Aekiel