Rust Monster Lovin'

[Henry]

...The monster is actually tougher than it was before. It forces a hard choice, because when the wizard goes up to wail on it, it's potent bite will mean he can't stay up there for long. And you better hope the rogue can climb and listen and spot, because otherwise, the thing is going to sneak up on you five minutes later and smack you around a bit, too.

Having read it, I have to disagree. With a poor AC and twenty-plus hit points, a first level barbarian would beat this thing to death by himself with his limped up -2 to -6 greatsword and not think twice about it, because the limped-up greatsword will come right back to normal in 10 minutes. The bite damage and attack bonus is not enough to deter him in the least. That doesn't strike me as a CR 3 challenge, much less a challenge at all. Even ability damage takes a day or so to heal without spells - this is like ability damage that never takes you below a 10 ability score, and goes away in 10 minutes.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I like them because they rock the status quo. Few things in the lower CRs makes the PCs wake up and smell the coffee like something annihilating their weapon.

So you like them because they scare the players. Perhaps the whole "save or die" mechanic is fun. The whole D&D-style shock-and-awe.

In what way does the revised rust monster not still scare players? It's now "save or get damaged." Damaged doesn't have the finality of death, but it does introduce and enhance the fear of it, the creeping awareness that it's breathing down your back.

This creature, translated to a higher CR, might be something like a Death Monster. If you attack it, you get to make one save, or die. In higher-level D&D, death is no more a problem then destroyed equipment. I don't think I'd use the monster either way.

Part of me wonders also what the reaction would be if this "rust destruction" was a level 3 PC ability. What if my level 3 wizard could do a touch attack and destroy armor, and, at the same time, could have an effect where if a weapon hit him, the weapon was detroyed? Would that be balanced? Would the enemies send in their spellcasters to grapple him? I think I'd have a problem allowing such an effect into the game (especially if there was no limit on the times he could do it).

All of the above issues make me think that people are getting too caught up in the WHAM-O factor to really understand that the majority of people play D&D to go on adventures, beat up things, take their stuff, save the day, and get the girl. People want to be challenged, and challenged well. The MM's rust monster isn't a challenge. It doesn't have a warning shot, it just comes in, eats your stuff, and then laughs about it. It's not a hill to be climbed over, it's a roadblock. It doesn't say "if you use clever tactics you will escape without harm," it says "if you don't use metagame knowledge, I'm going to cost you about $2,000 GP. More if you don't use clever tactics. Or if the occasion favors me."

Yes, rust monsters have their place, but I don't see how the revised rust monster doesn't still fit that place? It seems like people are not upset because it doesn't rust anymore, but upset because it doesn't do it instantly after one save to anything.

Having read it, I have to disagree. With a poor AC and twenty-plus hit points, a first level barbarian would beat this thing to death by himself with his limped up -2 to -6 greatsword and not think twice about it, because the limped-up greatsword will come right back to normal in 10 minutes. The bite damage and attack bonus is not enough to deter him in the least. That doesn't strike me as a CR 3 challenge, much less a challenge at all. Even ability damage takes a day or so to heal without spells - this is like ability damage that never takes you below a 10 ability score, and goes away in 10 minutes.

True but there's a few assumptions nestled in there. The barbarian won't nessecarily know his weapon will be back to normal in 10 minutes. And the barbarian wouldn't have much to fear from a rust monster in the first place, anyway ("fine, I put my axe away and take out my greatCLUB. Then I hit it 'till it stops wigglin'."). So the original rust monster isn't a challenge against a barbarian, and neither is this guy. They're equal in that respect.

It's more challenging, however, in a fighter-wizard/sorc scenario, when armor and (most likely) metal weapons are involved, and the next in line to beat the crap out of it has an STR of 8-12 and d4 or d6 for hit points. In which case the bite is still scary. And the ability to avoid detection and move on the walls is even scarier.

I like your analysis and your encounter desing ideas. Do you have a newsletter I may subscribe to?

Hehehe, thanks. No newsletter, but I've got a little pet project going.

 

[rounser]

Sunder has been discussed; what about making the rust monster's attack a sunder which only works on metal weapons? The "rules philosophy" is happy with sunder, right? That leaves other metal stuff out, though.

Part of me wonders also what the reaction would be if this "rust destruction" was a level 3 PC ability. What if my level 3 wizard could do a touch attack and destroy armor, and, at the same time, could have an effect where if a weapon hit him, the weapon was detroyed? Would that be balanced?

You might need to take into account the following: There are design assumptions regarding the difference between a cameo involving a creature with a powerful ability like invisibility at will (like an NPC pixie) which lasts for one combat encounter perhaps before dying, and a PC with innate invisibility, which gets used every combat encounter, all campaign long (or say at least once a day in the case of a spell or ability) and thus has a lot more effect on the game. In other words, a monster's abilities aren't really to be judged in the same way as a PC's abilities.

 

[Sejs]

Sunder has been discussed; what about making the rust monster's attack a sunder which only works on metal weapons? The "rules philosophy" is happy with sunder, right? That leaves other metal stuff out, though.

You might need to take into account the following: There are design assumptions regarding the difference between a cameo involving a creature with a powerful ability like invisibility at will (like an NPC pixie) which lasts for one combat encounter perhaps before dying, and a PC with innate invisibility, which gets used every combat encounter, and thus has a lot more effect on the game. In other words, a monster's abilities aren't really to be judged in the same way as a PC's abilities.

What about, say, the ability to summon a celestial or fiendish rust monster via your average lv 2 or so spell?

Sure you're only getting old rusty for three rounds at a go, but that's still plenty long enough.

 

[Vanuslux]

People who can't discuss things without being vitriolic towards those with a different point of view aren't worth having discussions with.

 

[rounser]

Sure you're only getting old rusty for three rounds at a go, but that's still plenty long enough.

To destroy a lot of potential treasure, yeah. Same reason sunder doesn't show much popularity with PCs I guess.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

IMO, the reimagined rust monster offers a fix for a problem that doesn't exist, applying a rules band-aid where none is needed. That seems to be a trend. I'm one of those guys who thinks trusting DM's to have some judgment is a better approach than creating detailed rules for everything under the sun. I know the standard response to that: "most DM's aren't good DMs," implying that the players need lots of rules to protect their PCs from bad DMing. I don't have much to say to that, other than to point out a poor DM isn't going to get any better at judgment calls if he never gets to make any. Personally, I don't like (or need) the hand holding, and my players don't need coddling or protection from me. I like using my judgment, and I think it makes for a more fun game, all around. Rules are great and necessary, but not ALL rules are necessary, or even a good idea.

Ah well, this isn't anything that hasn't been endlessly thrashed out, debated, and ridiculed (from both points of view), before. What can I say? If it's working for you, run with it and have fun. If it's grating on you, there're lots of other options.

*shrugs and goes back to working on an adventure for one of those other options*

 

[rounser]

IMO, the reimagined rust monster offers a fix a problem that doesn't exist, applying a rules band-aid where none is needed.

What about that ethereal filcher? It steals something and buggers off to another plane. Never liked that thing, lacks the aesthetic appeal of rusty.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

What about that ethereal filcher? It steals something and buggers off to another plane. Never liked that thing, deus ex machinery and lacks the aesthetic appeal of rusty.

Never used one. I don't like them, either.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

I wonder if the medusa (or the Gorgon) is next on the list. It certainly fits the bill some brought up here...an instant petrification effect that, at the stated CR, is not easily remediable by the characters, and most certainly takes a character out of the adventure for the rest of the session, except if the group takes up with "hours" of backtracking to get to a wizard who can turn the character back to flesh. Might even take a few sessions, heh...

Or the mummy? CR 3 in my book, and only needs one hit to force a DC 20 save on you or inflict you with mummy rot, which won't stop until your character is at 0 Constitution and turns into a mummy himself? And I've yet to see a 2nd or 3rd level character cast Cure Disease by himself. So, another hours-long trek back to the village to get a character healed.

The chaos beast is CR 7, and can turn characters into slimy puddles of spongy goo....I'd say that's the higher form of the common rust monster, affecting characters instead of metal objects. And if your cleric doesn't happen to have Restoration in his memorized list that day, you're history if you don't make a DC 15 save.

How about the sea hag? Evil Eye, save DC 11, 25% chance of instant death, 75% of 3 days of catatonia that can't be cured without magic from outside at the stated CR of 4 for one hag.

The CR 6 Nymph with her Unearthly Beauty ability that forces a Will save DC 17 or slays you instantly.

Somehow I can't fathom how all those, and more, monsters can be tolerated in a game where "save or nasty long-term effect" seems to be the phobia #1.

What I wonder is how a rust monster can be described as a campaign-wrecking monster that throws a group back for hours or sessions of game-play. If it really cost the fighter his +1 sword, that's too bad, but nothing that will turn him into a helpless bystander for the rest of the adventure, especially as most published (and plenty homebrewed) adventures will have another +1 weapon sitting around in the same dungeon he met the rust monster. For the most groups, it won't be more than that one weapon that gets lost...except if the characters are slow on their mental feet and simply stand around giggling in glee as the fighter is rusted down to nudeness. And yeah, this monster will hurt weapon specialists that only run around and train with that one weapon more than the general fighter...which is bad why? Being a weapon specialist gives most characters plenty bonuses on fighting with that one weapon, and one of the few disadvantages those characters have IS when they lose their weapon and have no fast replacement in sight. Ergo, they make themselves more vulnerable to weapon loss in the first place, so they have the least reason to complain when that actually happens.