D&D 5E RE: Tarasque vs. 5th lv. Wizard scenario - how does Wizard know to use Acid Splash?!?

[Elderbrain]

(Sigh...) YES, the Tarasque could throw a waggon, etc. But the Godzilla comparison is wrong. Comparing the Tarasque in size or strength to Godzilla is like comparing the Moon in size to Jupiter... they're both huge, sure, but one is vastly larger than the other. To accurately Stat out Godzilla ' Strength score, you'd have to use 3e/3.5 rules or Pathfinder, where there's no upper limit on how high it can go (and Godzilla, accurately done to even his weakest movie version, would be one hell of an Epic monster, with a ridiculous CR number...) Godzilla could step on the Tarasque with his foot, for crying' out loud! Doesn't mean Mr. T is a whimp, but hey, size matters! The maximum strength score possible, with a Gargantuan creature, only gets you to a lift of (I believe) 7,200 pounds, and that doesn't mean you can actually THROW that load, just move it. Godzilla, on the other hand, has picked up and thrown creatures weighing far more than that in his films. So, no comparison.

 

[Eric V]

they should do 6d12+10 (Double the weight, add 2d12 to be nice, I would make it 8d12+10)

congrats... a small brick building deals 6d12+10 on a successful hit

...

Ok, so just to make sure I understand, do all of you who go with this approach feel that this attack, which does significantly more damage than any of the Tarrasque's other attacks, is meant to be missing from its stat block? And that this is a feature?

If the Tarrasque is meant to do 49 (6d12+10) damage with an attack, it should bloody well be included in the stat block. The designers made sure to point out how much damage an orc does with a javelin, for gosh's sake, but decided to leave this best attack of the Tarrasque missing?

Either the Tarrasque is really not meant to be doing that kind of damage at range (if at all) or they messed up royal in the stat block write-up.

Side note: I am not sure the Tarrasque should be as good at throwing things as Giants, who make such activity part of their culture and warfare.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Either the Tarrasque is really not meant to be doing that kind of damage at range (if at all) or they messed up royal in the stat block write-up.

Or their design goals are different than the things you personally want to see in the game you play.

 

[keterys]

No reason it can't be all 3.

 

[Sacrosanct]

...

Ok, so just to make sure I understand, do all of you who go with this approach feel that this attack, which does significantly more damage than any of the Tarrasque's other attacks, is meant to be missing from its stat block? And that this is a feature?

If the Tarrasque is meant to do 49 (6d12+10) damage with an attack, it should bloody well be included in the stat block. The designers made sure to point out how much damage an orc does with a javelin, for gosh's sake, but decided to leave this best attack of the Tarrasque missing?

Either the Tarrasque is really not meant to be doing that kind of damage at range (if at all) or they messed up royal in the stat block write-up.

Side note: I am not sure the Tarrasque should be as good at throwing things as Giants, who make such activity part of their culture and warfare.

OR, and this is what I think is the most plausible, the Tarrasque's stat block only includes those most common tactics it uses, but that doesn't mean it's limited to only them. An orc can throw a burning flask of oil as well as a PC, but it's not in the stat block is it? An ape can pick up a club and use it, but it's not explicitly listed in the stat block is it?

When people complain about boring monsters, I often feel it's because they only think a monster is capable of doing what is explicitly in a stat block, and that's pretty depressing actually. A game that is built around indulging in our imaginations where imagination isn't used is just that.


*Edit* if you really want to complain about the monster's stat block, complain about it's 40ft movement rate. A creature 70ft long built like that being able to move only slightly faster than a 6ft human? That's the biggest WTF part of it, IMO.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

The only reason I can guess the Tarrasque is lacking because it's supposed to be a wake up call to the DM that modifying monsters is part of the job, especially when players are reading the MM. DMG has the rules on what abilities matter to CR and how to tweak monsters to better serve the DM's game.

If the DM wants 30 points of regen per round on the Tarrasque, decrease the Big T's HP by 90 HP and add the regen for the same CR.

For Ranged Attack(s), as long as the ranged attack or attacks don't have a higher hit bonus or do more potential damage that the beasts melee routine, it's the same CR. The only time the presence of a ranged attack on a creature matters for it's CR is when it can fly before CR10. So giving it a set of regenerating launchable spikes like the Paizo tarrasque or the 5E manticore and you'll close the range attack gap WOTC left in to keep the tarrasque more classic. (Interchangeable with other attacks, thus up to 5 a round, using the claw's to hit and damage)

 

[Iosue]

(Sigh...) YES, the Tarasque could throw a waggon, etc. But the Godzilla comparison is wrong. Comparing the Tarasque in size or strength to Godzilla is like comparing the Moon in size to Jupiter... they're both huge, sure, but one is vastly larger than the other. To accurately Stat out Godzilla ' Strength score, you'd have to use 3e/3.5 rules or Pathfinder, where there's no upper limit on how high it can go (and Godzilla, accurately done to even his weakest movie version, would be one hell of an Epic monster, with a ridiculous CR number...) Godzilla could step on the Tarasque with his foot, for crying' out loud! Doesn't mean Mr. T is a whimp, but hey, size matters! The maximum strength score possible, with a Gargantuan creature, only gets you to a lift of (I believe) 7,200 pounds, and that doesn't mean you can actually THROW that load, just move it. Godzilla, on the other hand, has picked up and thrown creatures weighing far more than that in his films. So, no comparison.

FWIW, the original Godzilla was 150 feet tall. The tarrasque is 50 feet tall. I'm pretty sure Jupiter is not merely three times the size of the Moon. The tarrasque doesn't have Godzilla-scale height, but it's still within the range of kaiju sizes.

 

[Sage Genesis]

I'm really not interested in debating with you what percentage of strength one fictional monster has versus another. That wasn't my point at all. My point was that the tarrasque is really strong, and you could easily use another really strong monster as as basis for what it might be capable of, rather than use the encumbrance rules which don't work well in this instance.

The tarrasque IS supposed to be a walking cataclysm after all. I don't think it's unreasonable that a creature of legendary destruction would possess monumental strength appropriate to such a purpose.

*sigh*

You are approaching this from a prescriptive point of view. The tarrasque is described as really bloody dangerous, ergo it can do such-and-such. My point is that statblocks don't work that way. They are descriptive instead of prescriptive. Statblocks show what a monster is or does, not what it ought to do. A comparison to godzilla is to my mind silly because the tarrasque isn't based on godzilla, it's based on the tarrasque. Which predates godzilla by centuries.

depends on which Godzilla you're talking about. Either way, not sure what it has to do with a tarrasques ability to throw a wagon, boulder, or whatever. Do you disagree that a tarrasque can do that?

This is also a prescriptive approach. You're not really asking me if the tarrasque can do that, you're asking me if I think it should be able to do. To which my answer is: I don't know. There's more to throwing than just strength. There's also the biomechanics of the shoulder, hand, etc. The tarrasque is basically a big lizard-turtle-lion thing, none of which are famed for their ability to throw stuff. So if you ask me if the tarrasque can do that... I'm not sure. And that's the sort of thing I'd like the statblock to clarify. If this was a humanoid creature or a really big horse the issue would be clear, but it isn't shaped like either of those.

 

[PnPgamer]

Didnt tarrasque have immense regeneration? How does the wizard bybass that?

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Didnt tarrasque have immense regeneration? How does the wizard bybass that?

The MM write up of Tarrasque in 5E doesn't have that.