Rakshasas, Crossbow Bolts and you

[Breakstone]

And, as the equivilant of a 7th-level sorcerer, any rakshasa worth his whiskers should have the Sor/Wiz 2 spell protection from arrows in his known spells to provide himself with damage reduction 10/+2 against that pesky weakness which is undoubtedly known to him.

Not necessarily, Clain. Smaug from The Hobbit never new about his weak spot, why should a Rakshasa. If it's not common knowledge amongst adventurers, it won't be common knowledge amongst Rakshasas.

 

[clockworkjoe]

But why should the "blessed crossbow bolt" bit be common knowledge? Geez, that would be kind of like having Holy Water and Stakes for sale at the Quickie Mart in the Buffyverse. Vampires would no longer stand a chance against the basic commoner.

By having it common knowledge that a 1st level cleric with a crossbow can kill the toughest Rakshasa with one shot, you completely pull the teeth on what should be a powerful monster and make them (quite literally) a joke.

In my campaign, I allow Knowledge(monster lore) to be used to give players a chance to know what a monster's weaknesses are and so forth. If they roll a natural 20, I let them look at the basic entry in the MM. After all, they can look at the MM at any other time besides the game.

 

[Squire James]

And, as the equivilant of a 7th-level sorcerer, any rakshasa worth his whiskers should have the Sor/Wiz 2 spell protection from arrows in his known spells to provide himself with damage reduction 10/+2 against that pesky weakness which is undoubtedly known to him.

That 10/+2 DR doesn't mean squat (besides, their normal DR is already better than that). According to the MM entry, any hit scored by a blessed crossbow bolt kills it. Not a thing about whether that bolt does damage or not.

The best way for a rakshasa to protect himself is simply to convince someone he's something else! With the kind of Bluff and Disguise skills this thing has, it shouldn't be difficult. If the gig is up, there's still Mage Armor and Shield. That's AC 32, in case you're counting.

Why crossbow bolts and not arrows? No logical reason. I don't see anything wrong with the lack of logic... D&D is full of this sort of thing. Maybe some God of Ballistae and Crossbows ran afoul of rakshasa trickery as a mortal, and took sweet revenge once he became a god!

 

[LostSoul]

I can't think of any other monster with a similiar "insta-kill" vulnerability.

I like the Rakshasa's weakness. It means that you can throw a powerful monster - one capable of doing a whole bunch of cool, nasty tricks - against the PCs, and they'll still have a reasonable chance of victory. It's just that they have to head to the books and research, or look for Sir Michel who fought and killed one in his youth, or whatever.

I guess that would be an interesting D&D mystery.

 

[rounser]

Originally posted by Codragon:
I can't think of any other monster with a similiar "insta-kill" vulnerability.

You might want to check out Sean K. Reynold's Vampire template for such a creature:
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/monsters/vampire.html
It's "more physical and less supernatural" than the MM vampire in his words - think Buffy, Blade and Dusk To Dawn and the dusting you see in those and you have a good idea of what it's about. Relevant to this thread is that it features d20 rules for staking, garlic and sunlight as part of the description, and blood drain requires a grapple to latch on. Quite cool methinks.

Come to think of it, apply this template to 1st level commoners and you could have entire town infected as seanpires and challenge low level parties with the suckers. Break out the stakes...

 

[Xarlen]

Rakshasas are your Intellectual Demonic Villains. They are masterminds, manipulaters, seducers. Your demonic vampire, if you will. Thus, they're going to be Prepared.

In response to the 'Common Knowledge of Crossbow Bolts', if Rakshasa were anything in this world, they would Pollute the knowledge. They would change it, fake other weaknesses. Stage fights, whre they were 'shot with a blessed bolt' and it didn't work. Use illusions to fake other weaknesses, and 'disappear' (Any good Major Image will certainly help that). If one's been killed with a Bolt (And sent home), then no doubt others will learn. For example, if they rule somewhere, have all the mirrors of the kingdom banished. Then when someone shows them a mirror, they can smile and comment on their looks.

Next, about the 'Insta-Kill' factor and their weakness, you know, having 'Insta-kill' or 'permenant death' is a possibility. I've heard somewhere (Is it OA?) where a ghost killed with a Jade weapon will not come back within 1d4 days. It suggests there's more material there, some mystical purpose, that does this. Something off the beaten path like brass, or oak wood, or having a symbol painted onto their forehead, whathaveyou.

And, about Rakshasa being insta-killed by a crossbow bolt, how about Each Rakshasa having a different weakness. Hit with a stone from a saint's burial site, their own reflection (Someone mentioned that the other day), Running water, Sunlight filtered through glass, etc.

 

[JESawyer]

Sorry for the mini-hijack, but has anyone else ever presented rakshasha with anything other than a single tiger head? I know that 3E doesn't say anything about the different rakshasha forms, but I had a game where rakshasha had two elephant heads, a giraffe head, a wildebeest head, a rhino head and a hippo head -- all sorts of bizarre combos.

 

[hong]

But why should the "blessed crossbow bolt" bit be common knowledge? Geez, that would be kind of like having Holy Water and Stakes for sale at the Quickie Mart in the Buffyverse. Vampires would no longer stand a chance against the basic commoner.

By having it common knowledge that a 1st level cleric with a crossbow can kill the toughest Rakshasa with one shot, you completely pull the teeth on what should be a powerful monster and make them (quite literally) a joke.

There's nothing in the book that says the blessed crossbow bolt has to be common knowledge.

Repeating what I said before, it's a good bet that the more bizarre and outlandish something is, the more likely it is to be based on real-life myth, legend or folklore. Rakshasas in folktales don't have to worry about pragmatic-minded adventurers loading up on blessed bolts, killing them in one shot, and making a hash of the story. Gaming is slightly different.

Think of the crossbow bolt in broad terms, as a weakness that allows even the humblest warrior to kill a mighty demon in the right circumstances. A lot of bogey monsters from folktales are like this, with the classic example being the vampire that can be staked in the heart, or is kept at bay by garlic or a crucifix. You can remain faithful to this concept even as you change the weakness itself, to foil metagaming players. Eg you could say that the rakshasa is vulnerable to a silver dagger, or adamantine, or maybe it melts when soaked in water a la the Wicked Witch of the West. This retains the challenge and also gives you a ready-made plot hook, as the PCs try to find out the weakness of this icky demon that's tormenting them. For best results, you could even have the weakness vary for each individual rakshasa, although you may want to make sure this is communicated to your players.

 

[LostSoul]

For best results, you could even have the weakness vary for each individual rakshasa, although you may want to make sure this is communicated to your players.

That's a really cool idea!

 

[mmadsen]

Why don't other monsters have similiar weaknesses? Has anyone modified existing monsters so that they do?

I recommend replacing DR vs. +1, +2, etc. with DR vs. something mundane (silver, salt, mistletoe).

I also see nothing wrong with house-ruling monster weaknesses out the door (eg, Rakshasas, trolls) and replacing them with different weaknesses to keep players on their toes...

Absolutely. Besides, there's no reason for a big, clawed, rending monster to be a Troll straight out of the Monster Manual.