Rust monster versus Warforged

[Diirk]

Well honestly 2d6 isn't tooo bad for a base rust monster (they're only CR 3, after all), altho I still maintain it means a warforged has less to fear from a rust monster than a regular PC does. Its just when you advance them a bit that it starts to look almost harmless.

Maybe make warforged the same as everyone else and force them to make a save or have their 'armour' destroyed and lose their AC bonus til they get repaired?

I agree tho, I wouldn't spring it on players with no notice, like any houserule, it should be settled in advance.

 

[ken-ichi]

I see warforged as being made of the following materials in order of most to least (wood, stone, leathery materials, metals, various alchemical substances) A warforged with the Mithral or Adamantine Body feats have some of the metals being alchemically treated and combined with Mithral or Adamantine. Extracting the adamantine or Mithral metal from the alloy is impossible.
I also see most of the metals being used as supports (like bones) and reinforcing the stone to wood connections. The armor plating bits are mainly made of stone and wood. With the wood acting as the 'soft' flesh with leathery bits as sinews and tendons allowing ease of movement.
So a rust monsters tentacle hits the outer stone and wood shell of the warforged, but some of the rusting power penetrates the stone into his body and rusts bits of his internals. Too much rust monster loving and he ends up basically boneless.

 

[Corsair]

Because the warforged's need for armour (and partially weapons) is negated by his racial abilities, as things are written, he is LESS vulnerable to rust monster attacks, not more vulnerable.

More or less vulnerable than any of the following:

Monk - Any race
Wizard - Any race
Sorcerer - Any race
Druid - Any race
Bard - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)
Ranger - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)
Rogue - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)

I would contend that in fact, with the exception of "tanks" (fighters, paladins, barbarians, clerics), every other character type has little to fear from a rust monster. And even then, a Warforged tank still has to worry about his magic weapons, which are the most expensive items he has.

In any case, at the level when it becomes a problem, the monk/rogue/bard/ranger in leather armor and armed with a club would be able to defeat the rusty in single combat.

 

[Diirk]

More or less vulnerable than any of the following:

Monk - Any race
Wizard - Any race
Sorcerer - Any race
Druid - Any race
Bard - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)
Ranger - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)
Rogue - Any race (unlikely to have heavy armor or be in melee with it)

I would contend that in fact, with the exception of "tanks" (fighters, paladins, barbarians, clerics), every other character type has little to fear from a rust monster. And even then, a Warforged tank still has to worry about his magic weapons, which are the most expensive items he has.

In my experience bards, rangers and rogues tend to wear chain shirts (mithral if they want no acp) which can be destroyed just fine. I'm also not sure that suggesting these characters will usually use archery or otherwise stay at range is at all accurate; however even assuming thats the case, you could also argue that a warforged might not be in melee combat with it either and thus be no more vulnerable.

You do have a point with sorcerers, wizards, druids and monks, however.

Also a warforged tank would be well advised to hide his weapons away and simply use his natural attacks which have no adverse side effects... no club necessary.