3.5 was edition I played the most. It was a reason why I quit RPGs for nearly a decade because I hated it so much.

Every time I see another meme about how amazing 3.5 Tarrasque is, I remmember how amogn actual 3.5 players Tarrasque was the biggest joke. It was always brought up as definite proof designers have no idea how to make good monster. It was laughably easy to beat. A wizard could casually solo it, the same abilities people now miss in 3.5 amounted to ribbons. It was a laughingstock, forums had 100+ pages discussions how to fix it and general consensus was it’;s beyond saving. It was first proof in 3.5 if you cannot use magic you’re only good to roll over and die.

I honestly don’t know if everyone claiming 3.5 Tarrasque is such a horrifying monster are trying to rewrite history or unintentionally proving what a broken, unplayable pile of garbage 3.5 was, if it’s biggest punching bag is actually dangerous in a different, better designed game.

  • Icalasari@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Could you give examples? I never heard of it being easy to beat, and I would love a laugh at it being easily handled

    • eerongal@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      the usual go to back in the day was to drown it, because it wasnt immune to that in any way. Simply gate it to the plane of water. There was a number of other work arounds like that too.

      • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Killing it by banishing it to another dimension of reality sounds like the epic, high level stuff the Terrasque was made for

    • maquise@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I remember the go to strategy being to summon an Alip, an incorporeal undead that can drain strength without needing a save.

        • smeg@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I think that’s still the case in 5e, there are just way less monsters with ability-draining attacks (shadows are the one most players have encountered, they can still be pretty deadly!)

          • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah but the problem is that there isn’t a list of what happens for each score, so people aren’t quite sure if it’s a monster specific condition. It does seem to match up with the old rules though, so I’d just default to that. STR and CON are instant death, DEX is total paralysis, the mentals are comas/nonresponsive.

            • smeg@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I thought they were all instant death, though I can’t remember if I read it somewhere or just assumed it. Makes sense though:

              • STR: too weak for your heart to beat, die
              • CON: too frail and sickly to live, die
              • DEX: too clumsy to survive, fall over and bang your head, die
              • INT: too stupid to keep breathing, die
              • WIS: too oblivious to survive, walk off a cliff, die
              • CHA: too awkward and unlikable, stabbed like Caesar, die
    • krellor@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, I ran campaigns from first through 3.5, never really played 4th or 5th. I’m curious how 3.5 tarrasque is easy to beat with anything other than broken munchkin builds from conflicting source materials that no sane DM would allow, or would be reserved for epic level campaigns. Like sure, when you get to a point where you can casually cast things like hellball, then things like the tarrasque might be easy. But at that point you will be doing the tango with the outer realm creatures and Demi gods.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        My personal favorite:

        A 9th level druid (any druid) flies 40ft in the air and upcasts one of their summon animals spells to summon 8 giant owls, then makes them fall prone.

        3.5 falling damage was both clear cut and bonkers. Your Owl MIRV would do an average of 679 damage.

        Not munchkin, not a special build, just the base rules and a default druid. It’s even easy to write off thematically as the owls kamikaze dive bombing it instead of just falling!

        The 3.5 Tarrasque didn’t have the 5.0 damage resistance to non-magic weapons, it has a flat 15 DR, which was the style at the time, but useless against the numbers falling damage mechanics would push out.

        https://www.reddit.com/r/powergamermunchkin/comments/wjtvch/whats_the_easiest_way_to_kill_a_tarrasque/

        I think a good DM would say the summoned animals aren’t magic slaves and simply would not kill themselves doing this, but at the end of the day you could also just do this with large rocks so you might as well let them have kamikaze owls.

        • Rheios@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          How do they manage an average of 679 damage?

          First Aerial bombardment rules would probably give the Tarrasque a DC 15 Reflex save for half damage for each. Assuming it was a surprise at first the Tarrasque probably doesn’t get this so I’ll ignore it.

          Second, a Giant owl’s likely only weigh like 140lbs by loose calculation, being a little over 4x the height of a snowy owl (so assuming 4 times equivalent weight and then cubed is 64kg which approximately equals 141lbs. It could be a little higher but its not breaking 200lbs) and requiring falling at least 20ft before they even start ranking damage by the srd 3.5 rules for items falling on players (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/environment.htm). Assuming you meant 40ft over the Tarrasque, and allowing for 1d6 damage every 10ft past the point instead of the 20ft that’s implied to be required, the owls would deal 2d6 damage each at that height, requiring 20ft of falling to start incurring damage. Even without it that’s not 679 damage.

          That’s pretty much 0 damage too, because 2d6 per owl - subtract the DR 15 of the tarrasque from each instance of damage - is 0 damage. Iirc there was a min 1 damage even for negative strength modifiers but DR superseded that. Even if I’m wrong that’s 1 damage per owl max.

          Even if you went the 220ft up above the Tarrasque you’d need to hit maximum fall speed under the more polite 1d6/10ft rules, after falling 20ft, you’d end up with 20d6 each, the cap for fall damage. Which after DR is 440 damage.560 damage without DR.

          Which actually isn’t that high up. I thought the Tarrasque was taller than 50ft, but its still a hell of a timed shot tbh. It assumes the Tarrasque doesn’t move for like 6 or 7 rounds, or moves in a straight line into the falling birds.

          That doesn’t’ fix the weakness of a Tarrasque to some form of high impact drop damage, necessarily, just means that I’m suspicious the birds can pull it off.