I’m considering a strategy, similar to a child getting their head stuck in a fence, where two Wall of Force spells are used to “pillory” a Tarrasque by positioning the walls on either side of its neck—or perhaps like a belt around its midsection. This would involve using a simulacrum to cast the second Wall of Force, so there’s no issue with concentration limits.
The spell allows the caster to shape a 100-foot-long wall made up of ten 10-foot-by-10-foot contiguous panels, which can be arranged horizontally, vertically, or at an angle. Both the original caster and the simulacrum would use their sections of wall to create this "restraint," with the goal of trapping the Tarrasque between the two walls. The casters would also choose to push the Tarrasque into the space between the walls.
I'm not going to say it's impossible, but the naive approach of creating walls around its neck won't work:
If the wall cuts through a creature’s space when it appears, the creature is pushed to one side of the wall (you choose which side).
The walls are indestructible, so with enough surface area (or a clever enough configuration) you could trap a Tarrasque with one for as long as they last.
Basically, no. You can't shape a Wall of Force or similar effect that precisely. A Tarrasque occupies a 4x4x4 cube as far as a typical D&D grid is concerned, and you cannot place a Wall of Force anywhere within that cube and have both the creature and the wall still be there when it resolves.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To me it's not so much the number of Wall of Force but the free space available since everyone of them cuting through a creature’s space push it to one side of the wall.
The corner case is when other existing walls or source of total cover already there prevent the target from being pushed in there.
To me it's not so much the number of Wall of Force but the free space available since everyone of them cuting through a creature’s space push it to one side of the wall.
The corner case is when other existing walls or source of total cover already there prevent the target from being pushed in there.
I mean .. as far as my reading comprehension suffices, you cannot in any way squeeze a tarrasque - or any other being - between two walls of force, denying it movement. It will always be able to simply walk out. With four, you could keep it in place. Well. Five, really, since it might be able to jump out. I guess.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To me it's not so much the number of Wall of Force but the free space available since everyone of them cuting through a creature’s space push it to one side of the wall.
The corner case is when other existing walls or source of total cover already there prevent the target from being pushed in there.
I mean .. as far as my reading comprehension suffices, you cannot in any way squeeze a tarrasque - or any other being - between two walls of force, denying it movement. It will always be able to simply walk out. With four, you could keep it in place. Well. Five, really, since it might be able to jump out. I guess.
With enought Wall of Force a Tarrasque could boxed in, but the OP is asking to make them appear on either side of its neck, which is different considering the spell contain a clause for that.
With enought Wall of Force a Tarrasque could boxed in, but the OP is asking to make them appear on either side of its neck, which is different considering the spell contain a clause for that.
Well of course you can make them appear on either side of it's neck. But it achieves absolutely nothing. With two walls of force, you could create a tunnel and force it to walk it. With four, you could actually constrain it. Or, as mentioned, with five.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To me it's not so much the number of Wall of Force but the free space available since everyone of them cuting through a creature’s space push it to one side of the wall.
The corner case is when other existing walls or source of total cover already there prevent the target from being pushed in there.
I mean .. as far as my reading comprehension suffices, you cannot in any way squeeze a tarrasque - or any other being - between two walls of force, denying it movement. It will always be able to simply walk out. With four, you could keep it in place. Well. Five, really, since it might be able to jump out. I guess.
You'd only need 3 or 4; WoF doesn't need to run along grid lines, so you can form a triangle fence and a roof if needed.
You'd only need 3 or 4; WoF doesn't need to run along grid lines, so you can form a triangle fence and a roof if needed.
True. Or a terrain feature and 2, or a pit trap (a big one) and 1. Hey, with a big enough pit trap, you don't need wall of force =)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
The Wall of Force can only be 10 10ft by 10ft segments. If you just do the bottom layer, it could step right over it(standing high jump if you want to be nitpicky). Additionally, you can't just do one in each direction, as there is a rule that lets creatures squeeze through small spaces.
You can't trap a Tarrasque using Walls of Force, unless the DM is asleep. You can't place the Wall inside their occupied space, they can simply climb/jump over them, and unless you're fighting one in a low ceilling cave made of adamantium and placing a 5th wall above them, nothing is stopping them from digging their way out as well. You can't place one under its feet, because that would be in their occupied space.
Also, what Tarrasque is going to stand still long enough for someone to cast 6 Walls of Force?
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.
They don't have a burrow speed, so how realistically they can tunnel is up in the air. No climb speed either, and a Wall of Force is impenetrable and gives you ten 10'x10' squares to arrange into a flat panel, so depending on whether or not the DM wants to further upscale the Tarrasque you can potentially have a 50 ft high barrier on each side of its space. Easiest way to coordinate the cast is to have every caster but the last in initiative Ready the spell for when that final person uses it. Legendary Actions can only be used on the end of a turn keeping it from being able to act until everyone got their cast off, so theoretically 3 or 4 casters could arrange a triangle fence- with a ceiling if needed- that at least makes it stop for a long time as it slowly digs under the fence.
You don't have a burrow speed, but i suspect you can use your hands to dig? Have you seen the claws and damage of a Tarrasque? Even stone won't last long.
Here's something else to consider. If 6 mid-level adventurers could easily trap a Tarrasque whenever it rampages, it wouldn't be all that feared, would it.
You're also relying on multiple casters to all be within 120' feet of where they want their walls to appear, to put up invisible walls that none can see and hope they all guessed the exact spot to place them so there isn't a gap large enough for the moving Tarrasque to squeeze through - and those walls only last 10 minutes and require concentration.
I know some people play D&D like it's chess, but the turn structure of D&D is simply meant to be an organized way of making sure everyone gets to take actions in what would otherwise be a chaotic everyone going at once process. Again, if I were the DM and people tried that plan, i'd have quite the chance of the Tarrasque being slightly out of position (or a wizard slightly guessing wrong on the placement of their wall, or maybe they don't get the timing just right), etc.
I recently used a Tarrasque in my last campaign. I actually made it undead to fit the story, but one thing I learned is that it needs to have regeneration. If I ever use one again, i've giving it regeneration to keep people from simply flying above it in a skyship and range attacking it to death.
If you're the DM and want to rule that your plan works - great, good for you. I would never allow such a low level tactic to work against what is supposed to be the strongest single threat in the game (and I say that understanding that WoTC screwed up in making the Tarrasque with such an easily exploitable vulnerability to ranged attacks).
Mid-level characters simply have no business taking on a Tarrasque. IMHO
Sure, I can dig. It’ll take me a lot of really uncomfortable work to do it, but eventually I could do it. Unfortunately for Tarrasques, their relative hand-size-to-body-size ratio is significantly smaller than mine, so they’re gonna be at it a lot longer. It’s not gonna hold one until the end of time, but I’d say the spells would time out before a large enough hole was excavated.
Sure, I can dig. It’ll take me a lot of really uncomfortable work to do it, but eventually I could do it. Unfortunately for Tarrasques, their relative hand-size-to-body-size ratio is significantly smaller than mine, so they’re gonna be at it a lot longer. It’s not gonna hold one until the end of time, but I’d say the spells would time out before a large enough hole was excavated.
I would disagree that this is a safe assumption. Tarrasques appear to have forelimbs with massive claws and they have the Siege Monster designation. Any creature that can do double damage to structures and objects of all kinds would be able to dig a good deal faster than a proportionally sized human. So if a Tarrasque spends every round just digging, it could almost certainly dig beneath three or four Walls of Force arranged around/above it in 5 minute or less since Wall of Force is only 1/4 inch thick.
Rough Math:
At a conservative estimate, the Tarrasque would be excavating at least 5 cubic feet every round. Five feet is only 1/8 of its general movement speed of 40 feet. Compare this to the Purple Worm, which actually Does have a burrowing speed of 30 feet compared to its maximum movement speed of 50 feet per round. So this is a VERY conservative estimate of the Tarrasque's impromptu ability to dig through the earth.
A Gargantuan sized creature like the Tarrasque would only need to excavate enough space to squeeze through, so the equivalent square footage of a Huge creature, about 15 feet by 15'. Again, being conservative on the side of the amount of space needed for the Tarrasque to squeeze under the WoF, that is a cube of earth that is 15 feet by 15 feet, that means 27 rounds.
Twenty-seven rounds is less than 3 minutes.
Re: the ability of a Tarrasque to figure out that it is possible to dig: this definitely doable for a Tarrasque, which has an INT of 3. What is a more familiar creature we know of with an INT of 3? A wolf perhaps? And boars (for some odd reason, as they are very social creatures) have an INT of 2. Both of these creatures would try to dig themselves out of such a situation fairly quick if they felt the biological urge to (like when hungry for instance). You might argue that wolves and boars are accustomed to digging, which is true. But even a lion, which is not known for burrowing, will dig in the ground after a warthog if it can smell/hear it. So perhaps the Tarrasque would take 5 rounds trying to claw or climb its way through the WoF. After that, it would try the next best thing: digging.
Where are you getting 5 cubic feet from? The thing has spindly T-rex fingers going by the images. Smashing up structures is very different from excavating, and those forelimbs sure aren't built for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I’m considering a strategy, similar to a child getting their head stuck in a fence, where two Wall of Force spells are used to “pillory” a Tarrasque by positioning the walls on either side of its neck—or perhaps like a belt around its midsection. This would involve using a simulacrum to cast the second Wall of Force, so there’s no issue with concentration limits.
The spell allows the caster to shape a 100-foot-long wall made up of ten 10-foot-by-10-foot contiguous panels, which can be arranged horizontally, vertically, or at an angle. Both the original caster and the simulacrum would use their sections of wall to create this "restraint," with the goal of trapping the Tarrasque between the two walls. The casters would also choose to push the Tarrasque into the space between the walls.
I'm not going to say it's impossible, but the naive approach of creating walls around its neck won't work:
The walls are indestructible, so with enough surface area (or a clever enough configuration) you could trap a Tarrasque with one for as long as they last.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
No if a Wall of Force cuts through a creature’s space when it appears, the creature is pushed to one side of the wall (you choose which side).
I have updated the original question with a bit more detail based on the responses so far.
Basically, no. You can't shape a Wall of Force or similar effect that precisely. A Tarrasque occupies a 4x4x4 cube as far as a typical D&D grid is concerned, and you cannot place a Wall of Force anywhere within that cube and have both the creature and the wall still be there when it resolves.
But ... four walls of force would do it.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To me it's not so much the number of Wall of Force but the free space available since everyone of them cuting through a creature’s space push it to one side of the wall.
The corner case is when other existing walls or source of total cover already there prevent the target from being pushed in there.
I mean .. as far as my reading comprehension suffices, you cannot in any way squeeze a tarrasque - or any other being - between two walls of force, denying it movement. It will always be able to simply walk out. With four, you could keep it in place. Well. Five, really, since it might be able to jump out. I guess.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
With enought Wall of Force a Tarrasque could boxed in, but the OP is asking to make them appear on either side of its neck, which is different considering the spell contain a clause for that.
Well of course you can make them appear on either side of it's neck. But it achieves absolutely nothing. With two walls of force, you could create a tunnel and force it to walk it. With four, you could actually constrain it. Or, as mentioned, with five.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You'd only need 3 or 4; WoF doesn't need to run along grid lines, so you can form a triangle fence and a roof if needed.
True. Or a terrain feature and 2, or a pit trap (a big one) and 1. Hey, with a big enough pit trap, you don't need wall of force =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You need a lot more than 4...
The Wall of Force can only be 10 10ft by 10ft segments. If you just do the bottom layer, it could step right over it(standing high jump if you want to be nitpicky). Additionally, you can't just do one in each direction, as there is a rule that lets creatures squeeze through small spaces.
You can't trap a Tarrasque using Walls of Force, unless the DM is asleep. You can't place the Wall inside their occupied space, they can simply climb/jump over them, and unless you're fighting one in a low ceilling cave made of adamantium and placing a 5th wall above them, nothing is stopping them from digging their way out as well. You can't place one under its feet, because that would be in their occupied space.
Also, what Tarrasque is going to stand still long enough for someone to cast 6 Walls of Force?
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
They don't have a burrow speed, so how realistically they can tunnel is up in the air. No climb speed either, and a Wall of Force is impenetrable and gives you ten 10'x10' squares to arrange into a flat panel, so depending on whether or not the DM wants to further upscale the Tarrasque you can potentially have a 50 ft high barrier on each side of its space. Easiest way to coordinate the cast is to have every caster but the last in initiative Ready the spell for when that final person uses it. Legendary Actions can only be used on the end of a turn keeping it from being able to act until everyone got their cast off, so theoretically 3 or 4 casters could arrange a triangle fence- with a ceiling if needed- that at least makes it stop for a long time as it slowly digs under the fence.
You don't have a burrow speed, but i suspect you can use your hands to dig? Have you seen the claws and damage of a Tarrasque? Even stone won't last long.
Here's something else to consider. If 6 mid-level adventurers could easily trap a Tarrasque whenever it rampages, it wouldn't be all that feared, would it.
You're also relying on multiple casters to all be within 120' feet of where they want their walls to appear, to put up invisible walls that none can see and hope they all guessed the exact spot to place them so there isn't a gap large enough for the moving Tarrasque to squeeze through - and those walls only last 10 minutes and require concentration.
I know some people play D&D like it's chess, but the turn structure of D&D is simply meant to be an organized way of making sure everyone gets to take actions in what would otherwise be a chaotic everyone going at once process. Again, if I were the DM and people tried that plan, i'd have quite the chance of the Tarrasque being slightly out of position (or a wizard slightly guessing wrong on the placement of their wall, or maybe they don't get the timing just right), etc.
I recently used a Tarrasque in my last campaign. I actually made it undead to fit the story, but one thing I learned is that it needs to have regeneration. If I ever use one again, i've giving it regeneration to keep people from simply flying above it in a skyship and range attacking it to death.
If you're the DM and want to rule that your plan works - great, good for you. I would never allow such a low level tactic to work against what is supposed to be the strongest single threat in the game (and I say that understanding that WoTC screwed up in making the Tarrasque with such an easily exploitable vulnerability to ranged attacks).
Mid-level characters simply have no business taking on a Tarrasque. IMHO
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Sure, I can dig. It’ll take me a lot of really uncomfortable work to do it, but eventually I could do it. Unfortunately for Tarrasques, their relative hand-size-to-body-size ratio is significantly smaller than mine, so they’re gonna be at it a lot longer. It’s not gonna hold one until the end of time, but I’d say the spells would time out before a large enough hole was excavated.
And that's assuming that it even thinks to try that in the first place.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I would disagree that this is a safe assumption. Tarrasques appear to have forelimbs with massive claws and they have the Siege Monster designation. Any creature that can do double damage to structures and objects of all kinds would be able to dig a good deal faster than a proportionally sized human. So if a Tarrasque spends every round just digging, it could almost certainly dig beneath three or four Walls of Force arranged around/above it in 5 minute or less since Wall of Force is only 1/4 inch thick.
Rough Math:
Re: the ability of a Tarrasque to figure out that it is possible to dig: this definitely doable for a Tarrasque, which has an INT of 3. What is a more familiar creature we know of with an INT of 3? A wolf perhaps? And boars (for some odd reason, as they are very social creatures) have an INT of 2. Both of these creatures would try to dig themselves out of such a situation fairly quick if they felt the biological urge to (like when hungry for instance). You might argue that wolves and boars are accustomed to digging, which is true. But even a lion, which is not known for burrowing, will dig in the ground after a warthog if it can smell/hear it. So perhaps the Tarrasque would take 5 rounds trying to claw or climb its way through the WoF. After that, it would try the next best thing: digging.
Where are you getting 5 cubic feet from? The thing has spindly T-rex fingers going by the images. Smashing up structures is very different from excavating, and those forelimbs sure aren't built for.