On the other hand, in that 428 rounds, the tarrasque has done an average of 126,688 points of damage to the buildings of the city it is trashing.
I don't think the ruler of the city is going to be that impressed with the flying level 1 cleric. :-)
Why? It's not like it's his fault the Tarrasque is there, and frankly, an Archdruid or Archmage will probably cause more property damage and certainly kill more people.
A second level artificer with access to either a portable hole or handy haversack can one shot the tarrasque. To do this, they create a bag of holding and then use mage hand to float the bag and the haversack/portable hole to within ten feet of the tarrasque. Then put the bag inside the extradimensional space the item creates, which sucks all creatures within ten feet in to the Astra Plane.
Technically the tarrasque isn't killed, but it is vanquished.
A second level artificer with access to either a portable hole or handy haversack can one shot the tarrasque. To do this, they create a bag of holding and then use mage hand to float the bag and the haversack/portable hole to within ten feet of the tarrasque. Then put the bag inside the extradimensional space the item creates, which sucks all creatures within ten feet in to the Astra Plane.
Technically the tarrasque isn't killed, but it is vanquished.
Depends whether a creature that doesn't actually fit through a 10' space counts as within 10'.
I think it would be perfectly reasonable for a DM to say that the tarrasque doesn't fit through it so that his epic, campaign ending encounter isn't one shotted by a second level artificer.
That said, RAW, it works. Here's what the Bag of Holding says:
"Placing a bag of holding inside an extradimensional space created by a handy haversack, portable hole, or similar item instantly destroys both items and opens a gate to the Astral Plane. The gate originates where the one item was placed inside the other. Any creature within 10 feet of the gate is sucked through it to a random location on the Astral Plane. The gate then closes. The gate is one-way only and can't be reopened."
The creature doesn't have to fit in the whole. ANY creature within 10 feet of the gate is sucked in. While I don't think the designers intended for this to impact a tarrasque, they knew that they had lots of creatures bigger than "large," and they intentionally didn't say "any creature that is large or smaller." They said "any creature." Rules -- both as written and intended -- would mean that the tarrasque goes through.
Unless there's some exception I'm missing (which could be the case).
They said "any creature." Rules -- both as written and intended -- would mean that the tarrasque goes through.
Rules as intended is "way back in first edition it worked this way, and we didn't choose to change it". As for why it worked that way in 1e, I'm sure the intent was to arbitrarily kill PCs who tried to get too clever, because that's the way 1e did things.
I think it would be perfectly reasonable for a DM to say that the tarrasque doesn't fit through it so that his epic, campaign ending encounter isn't one shotted by a second level artificer.
I'd have them think that they had vanquished him. Then I'd either have another portal open and the tarrasque be "kicked back over the fence" by someone in the Astral plane, or I'd homebrewa villain who was imprisoned there and not powerful enough to escape, and they manage to make the tarrasque their mount and use it as a key to their world-dominating plot. The players would realise they did this by trying to be smart!
I was just pondering the interaction between an Intellect Devourer (CR3) and the Tarrasque (CR30). I realised that 4 intellect devourers could take out the tarrasque in one turn, if they got the jump on it.
The intellect devourer can force the Tarrasque to make an intelligence save (DC12) or take damage, and then on an equal or higher roll of 3d6 (vs intelligence 3, so guaranteed) the Tarrasque drops to Int 0 and is stunned until it's fixed. They can literally stop it in its tracks. It would need 4 due to the Tarrasque's 3 legendary resistances eating the first 3 efforts. With -4 on the roll, the Tarrasque is more than likely to fail the DC12 check (needing a 16+ on the dice to win), and 3d6 vs Int 3 is guaranteed to stun.
What else in the world can really easily take out a Tarrasque, despite being a whole lot weaker?
All 4 intellect devourers would have to beat a passive perception of 10. With a +4 to stealth, there is a 24% chance for this to work
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Chromatic (Red) Dragonborn Sorcerer, the best matchup in the game #5e
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The weakest thing that can defeat a Tarrasque is the Sprite familiar of 5th level Warlock (Pact of Chain) using Investment of the Chain Master (turns the Sprite's arrows into magic arrows). Have the Sprite fly above the Tarrasque at a height farther than it can jump, and fire magical Sprite arrows for 1 pt of damage per hit on the Tarrasque until it dies. The Tarrasque has no defense against aerial attackers using magic arrows.
The weakest thing that can defeat a Tarrasque is the Sprite familiar of 5th level Warlock (Pact of Chain) using Investment of the Chain Master (turns the Sprite's arrows into magic arrows). Have the Sprite fly above the Tarrasque at a height farther than it can jump, and fire magical Sprite arrows for 1 pt of damage per hit on the Tarrasque until it dies. The Tarrasque has no defense against aerial attackers using magic arrows.
It can get out of range long before it would be in any real danger
Don't mean to argue, but they both have the same movement rate. Even accounting for legendary actions (move half its movement) it would likely never get out of sight, and in order to heal it would have to stop to rest allowing the Sprite to easily catch up. It is a flaw with how they did the stats for the Tarrasque in 5e, it is completely vulnerable to magic arrows from any flying creature - it has no defense except run and try to hide (which is itself funny if you think of it - the supposed strongest non-deity creature in the game, D&D Godzilla, has to run from ANYTHING airborne with a magic bow).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
The Tarrasque is not very well thought out, though, I agree.
And oddly, this is the first edition where it's been a problem. In AD&D it wasn't actually possible to fight the Tarraque if you had less than 7 HD (below that a no-save fear aura would either paralyze you or cause you to flee), in 3e and 3.5e it was quite thoroughly invulnerable to such lesser threats (large amounts of damage reduction and regeneration, plus massive AC and SR), in 4e it had a large aura that forced flying creatures down to the ground (and was also not particularly vulnerable to lesser threats).
The Tarrasque is not very well thought out, though, I agree.
And oddly, this is the first edition where it's been a problem. In AD&D it wasn't actually possible to fight the Tarraque if you had less than 7 HD (below that a no-save fear aura would either paralyze you or cause you to flee), in 3e and 3.5e it was quite thoroughly invulnerable to such lesser threats (large amounts of damage reduction and regeneration, plus massive AC and SR), in 4e it had a large aura that forced flying creatures down to the ground (and was also not particularly vulnerable to lesser threats).
They nerfed so much in 5e. As an experienced DM it is easy enough to buff everything up again but I almost never use any of the official creature stat blocks. At least not straight up.
You are correct. Sadly, for new DM's, that experience comes about fixing those massive holes in 5e only by going through them. Specifically to the Tarrasque, the ultimate question a PC should be asking is "Am I high enough level to escape this moving mountain?"
They nerfed so much in 5e. As an experienced DM it is easy enough to buff everything up again but I almost never use any of the official creature stat blocks. At least not straight up.
It's conceptual choice -- they wanted to make low level monsters useful against high level PCs, so they flattened the power curve and as a result most monsters are quite vulnerable to an army of chaff.
I personally think the jump height is a little low. Because you have to give relevance to the height of the creature. So you take any creature let's say human and give them 30 strength and see how high they can jump. If my math is correct it's about 13 ft give or take. That's more than 100% their height. If you take the same math and you apply it to the Terrasque he's jumping at least 50 ft high. If not more. Not 13. I know D&D likes to play Lucy goosey with their rules but this is one I would definitely house rule. It's jumping higher than 13 ft
The weakest thing that can defeat a Tarrasque is the Sprite familiar of 5th level Warlock (Pact of Chain) using Investment of the Chain Master (turns the Sprite's arrows into magic arrows). Have the Sprite fly above the Tarrasque at a height farther than it can jump, and fire magical Sprite arrows for 1 pt of damage per hit on the Tarrasque until it dies. The Tarrasque has no defense against aerial attackers using magic arrows.
It can get out of range long before it would be in any real danger
Don't mean to argue, but they both have the same movement rate. Even accounting for legendary actions (move half its movement) it would likely never get out of sight, and in order to heal it would have to stop to rest allowing the Sprite to easily catch up. It is a flaw with how they did the stats for the Tarrasque in 5e, it is completely vulnerable to magic arrows from any flying creature - it has no defense except run and try to hide (which is itself funny if you think of it - the supposed strongest non-deity creature in the game, D&D Godzilla, has to run from ANYTHING airborne with a magic bow).
These arguments never take chase rules into account. It’s in the dmg, not in the optional section, that in a chase like this you have to make an increasingly difficult con check each turn when dashing or take exhaustion. The sprite would drop out of the chase *way* before the tarrasque, especially with legendary actions which are *not* dashes.
I was just pondering the interaction between an Intellect Devourer (CR3) and the Tarrasque (CR30). I realised that 4 intellect devourers could take out the tarrasque in one turn, if they got the jump on it.
The intellect devourer can force the Tarrasque to make an intelligence save (DC12) or take damage, and then on an equal or higher roll of 3d6 (vs intelligence 3, so guaranteed) the Tarrasque drops to Int 0 and is stunned until it's fixed. They can literally stop it in its tracks. It would need 4 due to the Tarrasque's 3 legendary resistances eating the first 3 efforts. With -4 on the roll, the Tarrasque is more than likely to fail the DC12 check (needing a 16+ on the dice to win), and 3d6 vs Int 3 is guaranteed to stun.
What else in the world can really easily take out a Tarrasque, despite being a whole lot weaker?
The tarrasque has a +5 to intelligence saves and advantage against magic. Its chance of failing a dc 12 save is ~6.2%. You would likely need around 20 intellect devourers (which against a single enemy is a challenge rating 22 encounter) that all succeed on a stealth check. With a +4 and a dc of 10, each has a 70% chance of success, meaning the chance of surprising the tarrasque is ~0.82%.
I personally think the jump height is a little low. Because you have to give relevance to the height of the creature. So you take any creature let's say human and give them 30 strength and see how high they can jump. If my math is correct it's about 13 ft give or take. That's more than 100% their height. If you take the same math and you apply it to the Terrasque he's jumping at least 50 ft high. If not more. Not 13. I know D&D likes to play Lucy goosey with their rules but this is one I would definitely house rule. It's jumping higher than 13 ft
By this logic, an elephant would be able to leap at least 20 feet into the air. It’s hard for big things to jump high.
A second level artificer with access to either a portable hole or handy haversack can one shot the tarrasque. To do this, they create a bag of holding and then use mage hand to float the bag and the haversack/portable hole to within ten feet of the tarrasque. Then put the bag inside the extradimensional space the item creates, which sucks all creatures within ten feet in to the Astra Plane.
Technically the tarrasque isn't killed, but it is vanquished.
reminds me of the 2nd edition psionic who one shot killed a tarrasque using Disintegrate (2nd ed psionic attack, not the modern spell) back then I think you could do that at level 1, but the PSP check was nearly impossible, and you really did not want to fail a PSP check with Disintegrate.
Why? It's not like it's his fault the Tarrasque is there, and frankly, an Archdruid or Archmage will probably cause more property damage and certainly kill more people.
I think they should have a breath weapon and be much bigger and respond to the name Godzilla
A second level artificer with access to either a portable hole or handy haversack can one shot the tarrasque. To do this, they create a bag of holding and then use mage hand to float the bag and the haversack/portable hole to within ten feet of the tarrasque. Then put the bag inside the extradimensional space the item creates, which sucks all creatures within ten feet in to the Astra Plane.
Technically the tarrasque isn't killed, but it is vanquished.
Depends whether a creature that doesn't actually fit through a 10' space counts as within 10'.
I think it would be perfectly reasonable for a DM to say that the tarrasque doesn't fit through it so that his epic, campaign ending encounter isn't one shotted by a second level artificer.
That said, RAW, it works. Here's what the Bag of Holding says:
"Placing a bag of holding inside an extradimensional space created by a handy haversack, portable hole, or similar item instantly destroys both items and opens a gate to the Astral Plane. The gate originates where the one item was placed inside the other. Any creature within 10 feet of the gate is sucked through it to a random location on the Astral Plane. The gate then closes. The gate is one-way only and can't be reopened."
The creature doesn't have to fit in the whole. ANY creature within 10 feet of the gate is sucked in. While I don't think the designers intended for this to impact a tarrasque, they knew that they had lots of creatures bigger than "large," and they intentionally didn't say "any creature that is large or smaller." They said "any creature." Rules -- both as written and intended -- would mean that the tarrasque goes through.
Unless there's some exception I'm missing (which could be the case).
Rules as intended is "way back in first edition it worked this way, and we didn't choose to change it". As for why it worked that way in 1e, I'm sure the intent was to arbitrarily kill PCs who tried to get too clever, because that's the way 1e did things.
I'd have them think that they had vanquished him. Then I'd either have another portal open and the tarrasque be "kicked back over the fence" by someone in the Astral plane, or I'd homebrewa villain who was imprisoned there and not powerful enough to escape, and they manage to make the tarrasque their mount and use it as a key to their world-dominating plot. The players would realise they did this by trying to be smart!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
A goblin with a wish spell
All 4 intellect devourers would have to beat a passive perception of 10. With a +4 to stealth, there is a 24% chance for this to work
Chromatic (Red) Dragonborn Sorcerer, the best matchup in the game #5e
oh and I have proficiency with sickles
A rot grub.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The weakest thing that can defeat a Tarrasque is the Sprite familiar of 5th level Warlock (Pact of Chain) using Investment of the Chain Master (turns the Sprite's arrows into magic arrows). Have the Sprite fly above the Tarrasque at a height farther than it can jump, and fire magical Sprite arrows for 1 pt of damage per hit on the Tarrasque until it dies. The Tarrasque has no defense against aerial attackers using magic arrows.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Don't mean to argue, but they both have the same movement rate. Even accounting for legendary actions (move half its movement) it would likely never get out of sight, and in order to heal it would have to stop to rest allowing the Sprite to easily catch up. It is a flaw with how they did the stats for the Tarrasque in 5e, it is completely vulnerable to magic arrows from any flying creature - it has no defense except run and try to hide (which is itself funny if you think of it - the supposed strongest non-deity creature in the game, D&D Godzilla, has to run from ANYTHING airborne with a magic bow).
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
And oddly, this is the first edition where it's been a problem. In AD&D it wasn't actually possible to fight the Tarraque if you had less than 7 HD (below that a no-save fear aura would either paralyze you or cause you to flee), in 3e and 3.5e it was quite thoroughly invulnerable to such lesser threats (large amounts of damage reduction and regeneration, plus massive AC and SR), in 4e it had a large aura that forced flying creatures down to the ground (and was also not particularly vulnerable to lesser threats).
You are correct. Sadly, for new DM's, that experience comes about fixing those massive holes in 5e only by going through them. Specifically to the Tarrasque, the ultimate question a PC should be asking is "Am I high enough level to escape this moving mountain?"
It's conceptual choice -- they wanted to make low level monsters useful against high level PCs, so they flattened the power curve and as a result most monsters are quite vulnerable to an army of chaff.
I personally think the jump height is a little low. Because you have to give relevance to the height of the creature. So you take any creature let's say human and give them 30 strength and see how high they can jump. If my math is correct it's about 13 ft give or take. That's more than 100% their height. If you take the same math and you apply it to the Terrasque he's jumping at least 50 ft high. If not more. Not 13. I know D&D likes to play Lucy goosey with their rules but this is one I would definitely house rule. It's jumping higher than 13 ft
These arguments never take chase rules into account. It’s in the dmg, not in the optional section, that in a chase like this you have to make an increasingly difficult con check each turn when dashing or take exhaustion. The sprite would drop out of the chase *way* before the tarrasque, especially with legendary actions which are *not* dashes.
The tarrasque has a +5 to intelligence saves and advantage against magic. Its chance of failing a dc 12 save is ~6.2%. You would likely need around 20 intellect devourers (which against a single enemy is a challenge rating 22 encounter) that all succeed on a stealth check. With a +4 and a dc of 10, each has a 70% chance of success, meaning the chance of surprising the tarrasque is ~0.82%.
By this logic, an elephant would be able to leap at least 20 feet into the air. It’s hard for big things to jump high.
reminds me of the 2nd edition psionic who one shot killed a tarrasque using Disintegrate (2nd ed psionic attack, not the modern spell) back then I think you could do that at level 1, but the PSP check was nearly impossible, and you really did not want to fail a PSP check with Disintegrate.