D&D 5E Chill touch vs Troll regeneration

[Paul Farquhar]

Of course MToF has other trolls. Nobody says there is only one true troll. There is a world of monstrous possibilities out there for any GM in any game.

No idea why you thought that was ever a question?

That doesnt however require that one change how the "troll" as presented in the MM or the spell Chill Touch need to be changed to accommodate this.

As for your GM, I find it amazing that you seem to believe they got the regen from bits from 5e. Is it so outlandish to believe they might think it up on their own? Is it so unthinkable that they got an idea from any of the many books, movies, games with regenerating creatures where parts of the whole grew and thought "hey, this is cool and I can use it in DnD."

Are you so sure this is a DnD trope he got from 5e when I can recall Reptilicus in the way-before-and-dnd days where the key risk was blowing it up then pieces regen into hundreds - cue creepy claw regen scene at "The End?"

But hey, look, my bet is that if you just give your GM some credit now and again you will see it as not just repeating "tropes" and may be will actually surprise you - thinking up stuff all on their own.

Generally, if someone cites a source, it's a good idea to READ it before replying. It makes you look less foolish.

MToF p244 "A troll that is infused with waves of necrotic energy as it regenerates [can become a Rot Troll]". However, nowhere under troll in the Monster Manual is their a line that states "If the troll regenerates after taking x points of necrotic damage in the previous round there is a 5% chance that it will regenerate into a rot troll". Ergo, MToF directly contradicts the literal interpretation of game mechanics as spelled out in the Monster Manual.

Also, I never said my DM "got it from 5e". He "got it" because it is a very common D&D trope, irrespective of edition.

 

[5ekyu]

Generally, if someone cites a source, it's a good idea to READ it before replying. It makes you look less foolish.

MToF p244 "A troll that is infused with waves of necrotic energy as it regenerates [can become a Rot Troll]". However, nowhere under troll in the Monster Manual is their a line that states "If the troll regenerates after taking x points of necrotic damage in the previous round there is a 5% chance that it will regenerate into a rot troll". Ergo, MToF directly contradicts the literal interpretation of game mechanics as spelled out in the Monster Manual.

Also, I never said my DM "got it from 5e". He "got it" because it is a very common D&D trope, irrespective of edition.

As I said, MToF adds new trolls. There is no need to amend or alter the standard troll rules. MToF adds the new info needed *if* you are using those trolls.

How ridiculous would it be to have the MM troll refer to creating the Rot Troll in the MM but then not have stats for that beast in the MM? Bet those wanting to find fault with 5e would love that design. But hey, obviously, can't please everybody if some have issues with adding more varieties in later products that werent mentioned originally. Huh. Oh well.

That MToF of course includes the origin info for its beasties, just like the other books provide whatever they feel is needed - adding new orcs or gnolls or tieflings as they are published. But, its silly to think these would be (or should be) in the original core before they were published.

Same with Chill Touch - really does not seem like the Waves of Necrotic energy as it regenerates has anything to do with chill touch, cuz chill touch stops regen while it does its thing.

As for what you tried to say or now re-state claim with your claims that your gm only ever played 5e but did the troll bits bit because it was a dnd trope but now that dud not mean he got it from 5e - whatever. Once you figure out what that story is, I am sure it will make sense somehow to say whatever it was you meant to say.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Yunru]

Generally, if someone cites a source, it's a good idea to READ it before replying. It makes you look less foolish.

MToF p244 "A troll that is infused with waves of necrotic energy as it regenerates [can become a Rot Troll]". However, nowhere under troll in the Monster Manual is their a line that states "If the troll regenerates after taking x points of necrotic damage in the previous round there is a 5% chance that it will regenerate into a rot troll". Ergo, MToF directly contradicts the literal interpretation of game mechanics as spelled out in the Monster Manual.

Also, I never said my DM "got it from 5e". He "got it" because it is a very common D&D trope, irrespective of edition.

So? There are sources of necrotic energy (note it doesn't even say damage) other than Chill Touch.

 

[Yardiff]

This is the way I look at it. There are regen monsters that don't have specific ways to stop their regen so Chill Touch is the way to go with them. Those that have a specific way to stop their regen should require that specific way. Specific (Fire/Acid) vs General (Chill Touch).

 

[Lucas Blackstone]

This is the way I look at it. There are regen monsters that don't have specific ways to stop their regen so Chill Touch is the way to go with them. Those that have a specific way to stop their regen should require that specific way. Specific (Fire/Acid) vs General (Chill Touch).

That seems weird to make a spell not work correctly when it is the regeneration that has the drawback to it of being stopped by fire or acid. It usually stops when they reach zero hit points but otherwise doesn't care what kind of damage the creature took.

 

[Immoralkickass]

This is the way I look at it. There are regen monsters that don't have specific ways to stop their regen so Chill Touch is the way to go with them. Those that have a specific way to stop their regen should require that specific way. Specific (Fire/Acid) vs General (Chill Touch).

There is no 'your way'. There is only the right way and the wrong way, and yours is clearly the wrong way.

 

[5ekyu]

There is no 'your way'. There is only the right way and the wrong way, and yours is clearly the wrong way.

Except on alternate Tuesdays when it's a Royal Fizbin.

What are the odds of a Royal Fizbin?

 

[Yardiff]

I'd make one change to Chill Touch and have not problem with it after that. I'd make it a touch spell as in its name and previous incarnations.