The Tarrasque regenerates completely even if her body is disintegrated. For animate dead you only use the corpse of a the dead Tarrasque and this dont stop the regeneration. 3 rounds after your killing blow you will have a living Tarrasque and a skeleton version.
Trap the soul should work but it doesnt destroy the Tarrasque for ever..
The Tarrasque regenerates completely even if her body is disintegrated. For animate dead you only use the corpse of a the dead Tarrasque and this dont stop the regeneration. 3 rounds after your killing blow you will have a living Tarrasque and a skeleton version.
Trap the soul should work but it doesnt destroy the Tarrasque for ever..
Would you mind citing the rules that brought you to that conclusion? Animate Dead seems like a pretty clear cut solution as far as RAW is concerned.
For animate dead you only need the corpse of a creature. The soul is untouched, still exists and the creature can be brought back to life via true resurrection. A new body is created for the soul. Correct?
The regeneration of the Tarrasque works similar to true resurrection. It is no need of a body, a complete new one is created after 3 round as long as the soul is untouched.
No form of attack can suppress the tarrasque's regeneration—it regenerates even if disintegrated or slain by a death effect.
Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust.
With Animate Dead you destroy the body but the Tarrasque soul is still alife and starts regenerating. Trap the soul is the only possibility i see but you only imprison the Tarrasque.
By fluffy RAW
the method to truly kill it has yet to be discovered.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I too would simply have the big T regrow out of a single drop of blood, standing next to it's own zombie (as has been pointed out, too many HD to animate as a skeleton).
My favorite arbitrarily long way to dispose of the tarrasque is to gate it into the plane of water - drowns every three rounds or so.
|
OP: For argument's sake, lets say the archetype negates any and all damage Big T can do. He just can't hit hard enough...
If you can't beat em, eat em...
The first set is the bite damage from being swallowed, then the acid damage (no DR) from the stomach fluids. Yea, it'll take a while to digest but not only is the fighter taking damage but Big T can deal damage to him and deal with his friends at the same time.
My favorite arbitrarily long way to dispose of the tarrasque is to gate it into the plane of water - drowns every three rounds or so.
I think that is the idea behind the Tarrasque. Something on earth that nobody can kill and even gods only can put to sleep or bane it from a plane or continent. Everybody knows it will come back one time .. maybe next year, next century or tomorrow. Mortals and Gods die but the Tarrasque will live forever. Maybe :)
DR/epic is put in the game because it COULD be bypassed, unlike DR/-, it's just extremely difficult and rare to do so. I'd suspect that if you talked with a dev, they'd say they included it as kind of a 'future proof' thing, a concept meant to be exceptionally rare in the early part of the game, but to be utilized with a follow up set of rules that were as of yet unwritten.
Smite Evil from a paladin also bypasses DR/epic, though it wouldn't help with Big T, since he's neutral.
If the tarrasque is still trying to hit you, sooner or later, it should just switch to trying to Combat Maneuver your face. (It has a +53 CMB, +57 if grapple)
Suddenly, 60 AC doesn't sound so cool :(
Also, REGENERATION OF UNSTOPPABLENESS!!!
EDIT: I just realized if you have slayed the Tarrasque, the bad guys should just shut up, cut their losses, and live the rest of their lives. If your nemesis can defeat the Tarrasque, he most likely can defeat you.
Also, onto the subject, asides from things that explicitly overcome DR, nothing overcomes DR. There really isn't rules for Epic weapons yet except those from 3.5 . Also, unless homebrewed, smite will do squat against a tarrasque (Smite Neutral! MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!)
Most human fighters I know at level 20 have a starting CMD (without str, dex, deflection, dodge bonuses and the like) against grappling of 50.
|
My point is that, while a few rare things might have a +6 or higher enchantment (the Axe of the Dwarven Lords mentioned earlier) that does not make it Epic. Rpic is a specific high level rule set from 3.5 that does NOT exist in the Pathfinder RPG. The designers have been very clear about that. This is why I'm asking - it does seem like a mistake or oversight to have that single, lone mention of Epic in the Tarrasque entry ...
My point is that, while a few rare things might have a +6 or higher enchantment (the Axe of the Dwarven Lords mentioned earlier) that does not make it Epic. Rpic is a specific high level rule set from 3.5 that does NOT exist in the Pathfinder RPG. The designers have been very clear about that. This is why I'm asking - it does seem like a mistake or oversight to have that single, lone mention of Epic in the Tarrasque entry ...
Epic is also mentioned in the solar angel entry. And the Damage Reduction entry in the Universal Monster Rules of in the Beastiary.
A few very powerful monsters are vulnerable only to epic weapons—that is, magic weapons with at least a +6 enhancement bonus. Such creatures' natural weapons are also treated as epic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
The behemoth subtype also has DR/Epic. And that subtype did not exist in 3.5, so it isn't an issue of a copy/paste error. It was made specifically for Pathfinder.
The Hekatonkheires and Thanatotic titans also have DR/Epic.
So DR/Epic does exist in more then just one creature block, and the rules even tell us just what an epic weapon is (one with a +6 or higher enhancement bonus).
The DR/epic mostly exists as a holdover from 3e. The 3.5 tarrasque has DR 15/epic, intending it to be a form of DR that could not be overcome by conventional means. This remained in PF, probably for compatibility's sake.
Now, the fact that multiple creatures feature DR/epic and also that the Mythic Adventures playtest mentions DR/epic, means that Paizo decided to just keep the DR/epic as a means of expressing a very high level form of DR without changing an already established norm. Instead of creating a DR/mythic and explaining that the two are interchangable, it's easier to just use DR/epic and be done with it.