What's the deal with a Black Pudding's acid ability? At first it says one hit and a failed save immediately destroys armor and makes it useless, later it says it deals 21 hit points damage to metal objects, and only after 1 full round of contact. Does the latter ever apply to armor that's worn by the pudding's enemies?
If you get grappled/constricted by it and your armor makes its save, does it take the 21 points of damage if you're still grappled after a round, or does that just refer to steel doors you try to hide behind, etc.? If the latter, does the armor take any acid damage at all in this situation?
Last night in The Hall of Harsh Reflections (AoW AP - possible (but only 4% of 8% per hour in the sewers likely) spoilers ahead, beware) the party was searching the sewers for Zyrxog's lair and I rolled the black pudding as an encounter. One guy in newly-enhanced +2 full plate got hit once and his armor failed the save. Immediately destroyed? Meanwhile, another guy in a +1 mithral shirt got grappled and constricted to death over several rounds. Armor made its save every time - no damage? 21 points of damage to it for each full round grappled? Just not getting how his armor could possibly be in better shape after they pulled his corpse out of the dead pudding than the stronger armor of the guy who just got hit once and avoided getting grappled altogether. Can someone who knows what they're doing walk me through this scenario, round by round, the way it is supposed to work? Please?
Very much appreciated!
Kang
|
I have yet to DM a situation where armor or weapons are subject to acid damage.
It seems quite contradictory to have a metal or wood weapon dissolve immediately when the pudding is struck, yet the pudding simply deals 21 points of acid damage on unattended metal and wood over the course of a round. Striking it with a weapon doesn't equate to exposing the material to the acid for a full round. Destroying armor and clothing on a single hit is also quite extreme.
Sorry, I don't have any suggestions, but from where I am, it really seems off.
Frankly I'd feel more comfortable having it cause 5 points of acid on each strike with a weapon, and deal 10 points when it strikes armor. When fully engulfed and constricted (or if the pudding is trying to get through a steel door), then the 21 points would apply (in all these situations, the items get a Reflex save).
I'm afraid I have little advice save this: the DM overrules all. Just decide how you want it to be, hat's the only advice I have. or sould I say semi-decent advice, i have plenty of other advice, but it includes screaming 'what a world, what a world!' and flopping yourself onto the ground.
...One moment.
You've got 5 minutes.
Just kidding, though I might not get to check before Tuesday for anything that comes in later than that - got really slow dial-up at home and a long weekend starting in what is now actually 4 minutes...
I agree it is confusing. And yes, I will check back on Tuesday... it won't be too late to be helpful until next Thursday evening anyhow. :o)
What a world, what a world!
I'm actually assuming whoever wrote up the blackpudding for 3.5e had something in mind that made sense. I agree DM gets final say - just trying to figure out what the authors expected me to say, if you know what I mean.
|
Personally, I ruled that the stated acid damage for the monster (delvers are also nasty) would affect the armor or weapon if the appropriate save was not made.
When you consider that acid deals full damage to objects, most non-magical weapons are going to be destroyed in one hit (21- 10 hardness= 11 dmg vs. the max 10 hp of a greatsword).
On the other hand, magical weapons and armor are seeing a +2 increase to hardness per point of enhancement and +10 hp, so they should be better protected. That +2 full plate should have only taken 7 points of damage per round (21-14 hardness) and it should have had 60 hp to begin with (40 base +10/enhancement), so I agree that it should have stood up to the pudding.
That +1 mithral shirt was actually more at risk... it would be taking 4 pts per round (21-17 hardness) but would only have had 30 hp (20 base plus 10).
Also, I just noticed that 21 damage is effectively the average of 6d6, so the black pudding's system could be applied to monsters with variable damage listed (like the delver).
I really hate "save or die/lose" effects in D&D, so I enjoy working out solutions to issues like this.
Maybe you should do a 'temporary softening' thing... if it dissolves the metal, it's gone for good, but ti gets back 1 hardness/hp each hour afterwards.
Yes, this doesn't make sense.
Yes, this defies physics.
Yes, it changes how a black pudding works.
Meh. A wizard did it.
Acid always ignores the hardness of objects, its wicked that way.
So taking RezDave's awesomely rules-based reply* along with the various other posts clarifying the effects of various errata, etc., I should not ever be dealing 21-hardness HP to anyone's worn armor; just having them roll save vs. utter destruction of said armor for each hit or successful grapple/constrict by the BP? The +2 full plate should have been destroyed on a single hit (even though the wearer avoided the grapple) due to that low save roll, but the guy who was grappled and made all 3 saves has pristine armor once they carve his melted corpse out of the dead pudding? I can live with that, I guess. Though I have a full-plate wearing cleric whose player will not be thrilled - the guy whose PC died will probably be happier, since his magic armor is in perfect condition awaiting his Raise Dead session. Sick but true. Let me know if I've misinterpeted any of these posts, please.
It just seems a little too harsh for the guy who failed one save, or maybe a touch too lenient for the guy who succeeded on 3... What do people think about these alternatives:
A) having the plate armor take 21-hardness damage (rather than be destroyed no matter how many hit points it has) for the failed save on a single hit where the bp's improved grab failed to get a hold, while the guy who was grappled for 3 full rounds but made all his saves has undamaged armor in the end as per RAW
or
B)The plate is destroyed upon the failed save as per RAW. The guy who got grappled made all 3 saves so his is not destroyed, but use the unattended objects damage of 21-hardness per full round of contact.
Neither alternative fully uses the RAW, but either seems possibly more reasonable - it's just real hard to visualize the guy who was half-covered in acidic goo for several rounds avoiding his armor taking any damage at all while the guy whose armor just got touched for a moment has his utterly destroyed. IMO common sense implies that either the full plate should be damaged but not necessarily completely destroyed, or the grappled guy's mithral shirt should at least get somewhat damaged. But game balance can certainly trump common sense on occasion (perhaps even in general), right?
If anyone thinks either of these 2 alternatives would work OK, please state which, and why. If you like the RAW better, please give reasons. Maybe I'm just too much of a softie, after all.
Thanks for all the feedback so far, BTW!
Kang
*rules-based replies being awesome because, of course, I can refer any player who complains to take it up with WotC instead of giving me a hard time! :o)
|
Have a failed save inflict the 21 acid damage (or whatever variable damage of the creature) rather than state 'armour auto-destroyed'. There's far too many variables to make that assumption (special materials, acid resistance, magic bonus). That way, anyone wearing heavier armour, magic armour, or special materials (such as adamantine) gets the benefit, though it still takes serious damage, and won't last forever.
One major point that struck me, is that the guy who was grappled possibly should have had his Reflex save seriously cramped (you may have allowed for this, I don't know).
Doesn't grappling reduce your effective Dex to 3?
Also, shouldn't successive grapples by the ooze have flung him to the ground and pinned him, which would prevent him succeeding at any Reflex saves at all?
Thirdly, don't oozes all have the Engulf ability or similar(don't have my MM to hand)? If so, this covers exactly the point you brought up; namely, that it hits, it gets a free grapple, and it if it wins that, it covers you (slurp, slurp!).
Also, you mentioned Raising the dead guy, to wear his shiny undamaged armour; doesn't being killed by acid make Raising slightly problematical?
Have a failed save inflict the 21 acid damage (or whatever variable damage of the creature) rather than state 'armour auto-destroyed'. There's far too many variables to make that assumption (special materials, acid resistance, magic bonus). That way, anyone wearing heavier armour, magic armour, or special materials (such as adamantine) gets the benefit, though it still takes serious damage, and won't last forever.
Thanks for the input, ie. for voting for my alternative A in essence, and for your reasons for choosing that option.
One major point that struck me, is that the guy who was grappled possibly should have had his Reflex save seriously cramped (you may have allowed for this, I don't know).
Doesn't grappling reduce your effective Dex to 3?
Nope. The rules simply state you lose your Dex bonus to AC vs opponents who you aren't grappling. No effect on your Dex bonus in general, therefore your Reflex save is unaffected. Even if it was just "lose your dex bonus" as opposed to "lose your dex bonus to AC", there's still be the "against opponents you aren't grappling" caveat to get around.
Also, shouldn't successive grapples by the ooze have flung him to the ground and pinned him, which would prevent him succeeding at any Reflex saves at all?
I had the black pudding just keep making grapple checks to constrict; I could have made checks to pin his victim, but didn't bother. It wasn't trying to keep him from speaking or any of the other stuff you can do when pinning an opponent. There's no requirement that a grappling monster try to pin its victim. Furthermore, being pinned wouldn't render one unable to make reflex saves; it just gives an additional -4 to AC.
Thirdly, don't oozes all have the Engulf ability or similar(don't have my MM to hand)? If so, this covers exactly the point you brought up; namely, that it hits, it gets a free grapple, and it if it wins that, it covers you (slurp, slurp!).
(I had to do a little more research on this one to make sure I hadn't missed something...) Nope. Nothing in the Black Pudding description or the Ooze Traits entry to that effect, though this particular Ooze has Improved Grab and Constrict, which I chose to describe to the players as the grappled PC being slowly engulfed a little more with each successful grapple roll the ooze made.
Also, you mentioned Raising the dead guy, to wear his shiny undamaged armour; doesn't being killed by acid make Raising slightly problematical?
Well, he had only just died when they finally killed the Black Pudding that ate him. They managed to drag his corpse out of the goopey remains. Then they washed the acid off him in the surrounding sewer water (after putting their periapt of health on him to keep the filth fever at bay, of course). I ruled there was enough of a corpse left to get him raised; bad enough that a PC died & thousands of GP in magic armor were destroyed - in a randomly rolled wandering monster encounter, no less - without also denying them the option to bring back their dead friend. Letting him cheat death also works well with some other extensive character background stuff for that particular PC - he's been trying to beat his 'family curse' all campaign now, and this is the first chance I've had to play that up for him in any way (other than having his ever-worried Aunt Fanny NPC continually nag him to quit adventuring before the curse takes him, which is frankly getting old). Coming back from the dead seems to fit that bill - back from the dead? Poof! Family curse broken, huzzah. They're in a major metropolis and just exposed a conspiracy that is bound to have affected at least one major religion that would be grateful, so I don't see any reason they wouldn't be able to get him raised. Other than just to be mean, anyhow.
Thanks again for the input (and for making me review some important rules!)
Anyone else have any thoughts on variants A vs B from my last post, vs just using the RAW as much as possible in this situation?
Kang
If you feel like a balance issue is at stake here then I would say go with "Option A". It sounds the most fair to me and keeps your game rolling, which is also very important.
If you feel like a balance issue is at stake here then I would say go with "Option A". It sounds the most fair to me and keeps your game rolling, which is also very important.
Man, do I have 2 players who are gonna love you!
I'm leaning this way myself at this point. They're already shelling out 5kgp for a Raise Dead; that plate armor is worth another 8k+ gp. 13000gp to recover from one encounter with a wandering monster seems harsh, plus they already took more downtime than I expected crafting magic arms and armor and I can only reasonably push back the Champion's Games so long... Taking more time to shop for new armor would just add to that.
Not 100% decided, but that's the way I'm currently leaning. I don't really have to have a ruling until Thursday evening when we'll be playing, so I still have some time to think.
Thanks for the continued input, folks!
Kang
|
|
Doesn't grappling reduce your effective Dex to 3?
Nope. The rules simply state you lose your Dex bonus to AC vs opponents who you aren't grappling. No effect on your Dex bonus in general, therefore your Reflex save is unaffected. Even if it was just "lose your dex bonus" as opposed to "lose your dex bonus to AC", there's still be the "against opponents you aren't grappling" caveat to get around.
Just checked this out; you're right.
That is totally bizarre...How someone can lose their dex bonus to AC, while retaining it for other purposes (Reflex and Finesse attacks) is not clear...*
Also, shouldn't successive grapples by the ooze have flung him to the ground and pinned him, which would prevent him succeeding at any Reflex saves at all?
I had the black pudding just keep making grapple checks to constrict; I could have made checks to pin his victim, but didn't bother. It wasn't trying to keep him from speaking or any of the other stuff you can do when pinning an opponent. There's no requirement that a grappling monster try to pin its victim. Furthermore, being pinned wouldn't render one unable to make reflex saves; it just gives an additional -4 to AC.
Ah, now, this may be the clue to the whole situation; the constrict ability...
The way I read it, a constrictor can deal its damage 'whenever it wins a grapple check' (MM p307), i.e (IMHO) in addition to any other effect (such as forcing a pin, dragging a victim away, etc). So it doesn't have to choose between dealing damage and knocking the target off its feet. It can do both!I know; you're going to say 'That's harsh!'. But if you read the grappling rules, you'll see that anyone can keep on grappling to deal damage, so Constrict should be better.
Plus, many creatures listed Constrict damage is identical to their Grappling damage.
If Constrict only does the same as a grapple from an unskilled creature, what is the point of the ability?
The clincher for me is the last line of the constrict description, '...if the creature also has Improved Grab, it deals constriction damage in addition to the damage dealt by the weapon used to grab.'
So the ooze slams, deals damage, takes free grapple check, wins, deals damage again. That's 5(!) results (2 lots of slam damage, 2 lots of acid, and 1 hold) from one attack. Damn, that's good! It seems obvious to me that constrict damage is intended as a freebie whenever a constrictor creature wins a grapple, regardless of whether it has Improved Grab, Improved Grapple, or what the aim of the grapple check was.
I think it ludicrous that someone who's pinned has no penalty to Reflex saves. Surely the whole justification for the -4AC is that they are 4 points 'less mobile' than normal?*
Thirdly, don't oozes all have the Engulf ability or similar(don't have my MM to hand)? If so, this covers exactly the point you brought up; namely, that it hits, it gets a free grapple, and it if it wins that, it covers you (slurp, slurp!).
Checked my Monster Manual; you're right. It's not a general trait of all oozes, which is really surprising. I thought that was a defining trait of Oozes; that they, well...oooozed over you? Still, the Gelatinous Cube has it, as does the Gibbering Mother (which isn't even an ooze, apparently. Who'd have thought?). So I feel partly vindicated. Still, the Cube has it since its slam attack is basically rubbish. Instead, it just walks into your square and it's up to you to get out of its way!
The Pudding's constrict effectively acts like Engulf, since it can slam you, grab you and squeeze you in one go, then next round drag you off, while still bashing and melting you along the way. Very harsh, but makes up for the fact that it has no secondary attacks, not even the 20HD Elder Pudding.*It appears the designers agree; the Pudding's Constrict write-up states the target has a -4 penalty to the Reflex saves vs the acid!
HaHa! I am absolved!