How far negative health can the Tarrasque get?

[Abbul]

I assumed there would be no limit, but after dealing a few hundred damage beyond its total, my DM claimed it would not drop below -10. Naturally, it went next, regenerated, I missed my AoO as it stood up by 1, and then swallowed me.

We killed it and I lived thankfully, but I still feel like I got jipped.

[KillianHawkeye]

The Tarrasque does not take hit point damage, so it never gets to -10. Instead, all damage it takes is nonlethal damage, which counts up from zero and has no upper cap. The Tarrasque can only be killed by dealing enough damage to bring it's nonlethal damage total up to (at least) it's full hp + 10 and then using a Wish to kill it.

Your DM was wrong.

[Crake]

The Tarrasque does not take hit point damage, so it never gets to -10. Instead, all damage it takes is nonlethal damage, which counts up from zero and has no upper cap. The Tarrasque can only be killed by dealing enough damage to bring it's nonlethal damage total up to (at least) it's full hp + 10 and then using a Wish to kill it.

Your DM was wrong.

Confirming that this is how it actually works.

[Captnq]

Although if he rules that you can't go below -10, close wounds is an great spell. You can interrupt dying.

[Drachasor]

The Tarrasque does not take hit point damage, so it never gets to -10. Instead, all damage it takes is nonlethal damage, which counts up from zero and has no upper cap. The Tarrasque can only be killed by dealing enough damage to bring it's nonlethal damage total up to (at least) it's full hp + 10 and then using a Wish to kill it.

Your DM was wrong.

Though it is technically true that the Tarrasque can't go below -10 (pretty much nothing can). It's just that he can't go below max HP either.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Cannot go below max hp? :smallconfused: If you are saying its nonlethal cannot exceed its max HP that is not true. If you mean he cannot.be damaged that is also untrue (but very difficult to do, typically it is easier to just pay for a wish).

[Drachasor]

Cannot go below max hp? :smallconfused: If you are saying its nonlethal cannot exceed its max HP that is not true. If you mean he cannot.be damaged that is also untrue (but very difficult to do, typically it is easier to just pay for a wish).

It can't take lethal damage. Period. Though if it matters you do treat it as having -10 HP after it is dead (though that's not the same as saying it has -10 HP, to be technical).

Even if you could deal it lethal damage, there's really no point. Lethal damage does not help you kill it.

[ZamielVanWeber]

There are ways littered around for unconditional Regen bypass, so it is possible to deal it.lethal damage. Like I said, using them is pointless since you can just punch it to 10000 nonlethal and buy a wish. I was just confused about your initial statement. It is clear now, buy originally thr juxtaposition on the two caused my to draw all the wrong conclusions. Insomnia fail.

[Drachasor]

There are ways littered around for unconditional Regen bypass, so it is possible to deal it.lethal damage. Like I said, using them is pointless since you can just punch it to 10000 nonlethal and buy a wish.

Just curious, but can you name a way? I am not familiar with any off-hand (I don't doubt that it exists).

In any case, even if you deal a million lethal damage to it, it doesn't die.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Only one I remember is trollbane, but it allows a Fort save and may act as a poison, ehoch Big T is immune to.

[TuggyNE]

Just curious, but can you name a way? I am not familiar with any off-hand (I don't doubt that it exists).

In any case, even if you deal a million lethal damage to it, it doesn't die.

Empathic feedback and hostile empathic transfer are two half-decent ways to do this.

[RedMage125]

It can't take lethal damage. Period. Though if it matters you do treat it as having -10 HP after it is dead (though that's not the same as saying it has -10 HP, to be technical).

Even if you could deal it lethal damage, there's really no point. Lethal damage does not help you kill it.

While you are correct in that lethal damage would not help you kill it, if you could (somehow) deal lethal damage to the tarrasque, it MIGHT help you knock it unconscious a little faster (since unconsciousness occurs when nonlethal damage taken exceeds current hp), which would be good for all party members involved, since the thing does a beastly amount of damage each round. You would still have to deal nonlethal damage equal to "max hp +10", but an unconscious tarrasque can have coup de grace attacks delivered to it to max out the damage characters are doing to it. And regeneration does NOT allow a creature to heal LETHAL damage each round, only nonlethal.

Here's a thought...is there a way to convert a ray spell into some other form, like a touch spell? You know, since the tarrasque is immune to all rays, lines and cones. I'm at work right now, and don't have my books, so I can't check myself. If that were possible, you could use Avasculate and reduce it's hit points by half (no save). Which, since it's not an effect that does actual damage, would not convert to nonlethal. So that spell would do zero nonlethal damage to the tarrasque, but would drastically lower it's unconsciousness threshold, allowing for the party to coup de grace the crap out of it.

[lunar2]

While you are correct in that lethal damage would not help you kill it, if you could (somehow) deal lethal damage to the tarrasque, it MIGHT help you knock it unconscious a little faster (since unconsciousness occurs when nonlethal damage taken exceeds current hp), which would be good for all party members involved, since the thing does a beastly amount of damage each round. You would still have to deal nonlethal damage equal to "max hp +10", but an unconscious tarrasque can have coup de grace attacks delivered to it to max out the damage characters are doing to it. And regeneration does NOT allow a creature to heal LETHAL damage each round, only nonlethal.

Here's a thought...is there a way to convert a ray spell into some other form, like a touch spell? You know, since the tarrasque is immune to all rays, lines and cones. I'm at work right now, and don't have my books, so I can't check myself. If that were possible, you could use Avasculate and reduce it's hit points by half (no save). Which, since it's not an effect that does actual damage, would not convert to nonlethal. So that spell would do zero nonlethal damage to the tarrasque, but would drastically lower it's unconsciousness threshold, allowing for the party to coup de grace the crap out of it.

you can deliver any ray spell with a melee touch attack, just like a melee touch spell.

[Urpriest]

you can deliver any ray spell with a melee touch attack, just like a melee touch spell.

Rules citation please?

[SiuiS]

Cannot go below max hp? :smallconfused: If you are saying its nonlethal cannot exceed its max HP that is not true. If you mean he cannot.be damaged that is also untrue (but very difficult to do, typically it is easier to just pay for a wish).

No, they're saying since regeneration makes it always take nonlethal damage, it's hit points technically never go down ever.

[Khatoblepas]

you can deliver any ray spell with a melee touch attack, just like a melee touch spell.

I don't think you can do that, that would be a houserule. But there is a way you can do it:


Hold Ray (Ex): At 7th level or higher, an enlightened fist can cast any spell that produces a ray effect as a touch spell instead. The spell's range is reduced to touch, and its Effect entry is replaced with "Target: Creature touched." She can deliver the spell with a touch attack or with a normal attack, and she can hold the charge as with a normal touch spell. An enlightened fist can combine this ability with arcane fist (see above) to deliver a ray-effect spell as part of an unarmed full attack action.

It requires seven levels of a monk/wizard prestige class, though, so you may just want to cast Wish.

[Harrow]

Although if he rules that you can't go below -10, close wounds is an great spell. You can interrupt dying.

Close Wounds explicitly takes effect before damage, so a health minimum makes no difference. It would, however, make Frenzied Berserkers much more powerful.

[Drachasor]

Close Wounds explicitly takes effect before damage, so a health minimum makes no difference. It would, however, make Frenzied Berserkers much more powerful.

The -10 minimum kicks in after death.

[Chronos]

You can go below -10; it's just that for most creatures that's deadly, and once you die your HP go to -10 whatever they were before. Consider a character with the Rage Claws soulmeld, who doesn't die until they reach -13, and suppose that character takes one point of damage per round, starting from 0. At round 9, they'll be at -9 HP, and alive. At round 12, they'll be at -12 HP, and alive. At round 13, they'll go to -13, die, and then go to -10.

[jindra34]

It can't take lethal damage. Period. Though if it matters you do treat it as having -10 HP after it is dead (though that's not the same as saying it has -10 HP, to be technical).

Even if you could deal it lethal damage, there's really no point. Lethal damage does not help you kill it.

Hostile Empathic Transfer, and its ability to ignore regeneration where all Big T's not dying is, would like to have a very strong word with you. On both counts.

[holywhippet]

There is a simple, if somewhat expensive, way of taking out a tarrasque and doing lethal damage to it. Just confront it with a mirror of opposition. The duplicate will be able to do lethal damage since they are the same type of creature. You'll still need a wish or miracle spell to finish it for good but between the duplicate and your party it shouldn't be too hard. If it is then you clearly aren't ready to deal with a tarrasque.

[Corrin Avatan]

I thought the agreed-upon method of getting rid of the terrasque was to teleport it to a demiplane where nothing exists?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Allips have Wis drain on a touch and the Tarrasque has terrible touch AC. It is super efficient.

[Corrin Avatan]

Confirming that this is how it actually works.

I thought that, if you took nonlethal damage that took you past -10, it was converted to lethal damage, that the Terrasque does not take?

[Slipperychicken]

What happens if we Baleful Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/balefulPolymorph.htm) it? Would that remove its regeneration, allowing us to kill it for good?

I'm looking at this bit in particular:
The subject takes on all the statistics and special abilities of an average member of the new form in place of its own except as follows:

The target retains its own alignment (and personality, within the limits of the new form’s ability scores).
The target retains its own hit points.
The target is treated as having its normal Hit Dice for purpose of adjudicating effects based on HD, such as the sleep spell, though it uses the new form’s base attack bonus, base save bonuses, and all other statistics derived from Hit Dice.
The target also retains the ability to understand (but not to speak) the languages it understood in its original form. It can write in the languages it understands, but only the form is capable of writing in some manner (such as drawing in the dirt with a paw).
With those exceptions, the target’s normal game statistics are replaced by those of the new form. The target loses all the special abilities it has in its normal form, including its class features.

[Corrin Avatan]

What happens if we Baleful Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/balefulPolymorph.htm) it? Would that remove its regeneration, allowing us to kill it for good?

I'm looking at this bit in particular:

RAW, it might work, but I think that takes some of the mystique of the Terrasque away.

[holywhippet]

I thought that, if you took nonlethal damage that took you past -10, it was converted to lethal damage, that the Terrasque does not take?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm

As stated by others, non-lethal damage doesn't reduce HP, instead it adds up on the target. When your non-lethal damage total exceeds your HP you fall unconscious. In theory you never die from non-lethal damage.

[Slipperychicken]

RAW, it might work, but I think that takes some of the mystique of the Terrasque away.

Absolutely, it would be a terribly boring way to do it. I was just wondering aloud whether it would work by RAW.

[KillianHawkeye]

There is a simple, if somewhat expensive, way of taking out a tarrasque and doing lethal damage to it. Just confront it with a mirror of opposition. The duplicate will be able to do lethal damage since they are the same type of creature.

This statement is based on what exactly? That's just something you made up. Do trolls not regenerate damage from each other's claws now either? Please go back and read how regeneration works again. Being the same type of creature has nothing to do with anything.

[TuggyNE]

You would still have to deal nonlethal damage equal to "max hp +10", but an unconscious tarrasque can have coup de grace attacks delivered to it to max out the damage characters are doing to it.

This doesn't actually work by RAW; coup de grace attacks cannot be made non-lethally. At all.


There is a simple, if somewhat expensive, way of taking out a tarrasque and doing lethal damage to it. Just confront it with a mirror of opposition. The duplicate will be able to do lethal damage since they are the same type of creature.

This also does not work, since the Tarrasque's regeneration is not overcome by anything, even Tarrasque, and the Mirror does nothing to change this.

If it was DR/magic or epic that was the problem, it would work, but it isn't, and it doesn't.

[Phelix-Mu]

This also does not work, since the Tarrasque's regeneration is not overcome by anything, even Tarrasque, and the Mirror does nothing to change this.

If it was DR/magic or epic that was the problem, it would work, but it isn't, and it doesn't.

The um...yeah, if it could hurt itself, that would open up several additional ways of killing it, not to mention make IA Tarrasque much more useful.

[Psyren]

Hostile Empathic Transfer, and its ability to ignore regeneration where all Big T's not dying is, would like to have a very strong word with you. On both counts.


No form of attack deals lethal damage to the Tarrasque.

Unstoppable force, meet my friend immovable object.

HET's clause about immunity doesn't work here because Big T isn't actually immune to damage - it simply doesn't happen.

[Erik Vale]

I'd say specific trumps general, but which one would be considered more specific?

[Drachasor]

I'd say specific trumps general, but which one would be considered more specific?

The rules don't say, but I'd personally rule that a creature is generally more specific than a spell or ability. Unless that spell or ability is designed just to affect very specific types of creatures or has special rules for them.

In my mind a spell or ability covers a broad range of enemies, so the special rules for a given creature are more specific than that. The cases that a creature's own text apply to are far fewer than the cases where an ability's text apply.

[Twilightwyrm]

I will affirm what others here have said in that, by RAW, you cannot deal lethal damage to a Tarrasque, and therefore cannot kill it by reducing its HP to -10. However, DMs should not push this principle beyond plausibility (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SlWegS2sS0).

[TuggyNE]

Unstoppable force, meet my friend immovable object.

HET's clause about immunity doesn't work here because Big T isn't actually immune to damage - it simply doesn't happen.

HET ignores regeneration, though. And guess where the quoted clause is? That's right, the Regeneration ability, where it takes the place of the standard "Fire and acid deal normal damage to a troll" clause.

[Psyren]

HET ignores regeneration, though. And guess where the quoted clause is? That's right, the Regeneration ability, where it takes the place of the standard "Fire and acid deal normal damage to a troll" clause.

HET says regeneration does not "lessen or change it." But Big T's regen is special - it simply makes the lethal damage not happen. It's basically the mother of all replacement effects. It's not reducing the damage, and it's not converting it to anything else - there is simply no lethal damage at all.

[jindra34]

HET says regeneration does not "lessen or change it." But Big T's regen is special - it simply makes the lethal damage not happen. It's basically the mother of all replacement effects. It's not reducing the damage, and it's not converting it to anything else - there is simply no lethal damage at all.

Would not turning Lethal damage into Non-Lethal damage being changing it? That is what regeneration does after all. And since 0 is less than any positive number, making the amount of damage taken=0 would in fact be lessening it. So how does Big T's regeneration apply?

[Psyren]

Would not turning Lethal damage into Non-Lethal damage being changing it? That is what regeneration does after all. And since 0 is less than any positive number, making the amount of damage taken=0 would in fact be lessening it. So how does Big T's regeneration apply?

What I mean is that whether the damage is converted to nonlethal is irrelevant. Even if it can't be converted, the lethal damage still won't happen due to the way T's entry is worded.

For example: HET targets Big T with a bunch of damage. It tries to make the damage lethal, and that's impossible. Big T then tries to apply an equal amount of nonlethal instead, and that's also impossible. The damage stays lethal, but can't be applied. As it was never applied in the first place, it's not reduced to zero. The universe compresses to a singularity and we are all error.

[Kish]

Unstoppable force, meet my friend immovable object.
They surrender.

[Harrow]

RAI, I would say 'cannot take lethal damage' isn't supposed to add anything, it's just the designers explaining how they thought Regeneration/- works. But it's not. This would mean, by my estimation of RAI, that HET would work.

By RAW, HET wouldn't work, but not for the stated reasons. It wouldn't work because RAW specifies an 'attack', which is pretty well defined. HET requires a touch attack which, AFAIK, makes it weapon-like and gives the Tarrasque immunity. If there were some other effect that didn't require an attack roll and explicitly bypassed regeneration it would work perfectly.

The list things that unintentionally kill the Tarrasque still seems to be Baleful Polymorph and any from of petrification, as petrified creatures are explicitly not dead, followed up by any sort of instant-death spell that affects objects.

Are there any other abilities that get rid of a targets special qualities?

[Psyren]

Effects that cause the opponent to make a saving throw are also considered attacks.

[RedMage125]

I don't think you can do that, that would be a houserule. But there is a way you can do it:

It requires seven levels of a monk/wizard prestige class, though, so you may just want to cast Wish.
Is that the only way? I could have sworn there was a metamagic feat that allowed one to do it as well. Ah, well. Ok, so an Enlightened Fist could Avasculate a Tarrasque and half its max hp. And again, even finding the ability to deal lethal damage to the Tarrasque does not help kill it, because the RAW explicitly detail the only way it can die. But it does lower its "unconsciousness threshold" as I said before.


This doesn't actually work by RAW; coup de grace attacks cannot be made non-lethally. At all.

You aren't "delivering a nonlethal coup de grace". The coup de grace attack is still made with a lethal weapon attempting to deal lethal damage. Which is basically an auto-crit (and Sneak Attack, if applicable). The damage from that crit is converted to nonlethal by the Tarrasque's own Regeneration ability. Regeneration does not make a creature immune to coup de grace attacks.
EDIT: After reading something on another thread, I reviewed the SRD and found that I was incorrect. Which makes me wonder how a party without a fire spell currently prepared is supposed to kill a troll, since the most common non-magic method is to beat it down, behead it, and apply a torch to the wound.

[Phelix-Mu]

EDIT: After reading something on another thread, I reviewed the SRD and found that I was incorrect. Which makes me wonder how a party without a fire spell currently prepared is supposed to kill a troll, since the most common non-magic method is to beat it down, behead it, and apply a torch to the wound.

Actually, you need to burn the entire body (or that's the usual narrative description).

Basically, the troll isn't dead when you behead it. Nor when you burn the wound closed. It still regenerates until it has received lethal damage (fire or acid damage only) equal to its hp +10.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

Ways to kill the Tarrasque:

Baleful Polymorph into a fish while on land. Loses regen. and suffocates.
Petrify then dissolve into acid. Nothing remains to be recovered.
Dictum/Holy Word/Blasphemy/Word of Chaos of sufficient CL. Destroyed by saveless evocation not covered by its regeneration.
Use spawn-creating undead to drain a relevant ability to 0.
Trap the Soul. Then expend the soul as material component for spellcasting.
Wish - transport option. Destination is to share space with a known sphere of annihilation.
Graymantle - removes regeneration.
Starvation, Drowning or Suffocation. They aren't attacks so the Tarrasque's special clause doesn't apply and they ignore regeneration.

[Slipperychicken]

EDIT: After reading something on another thread, I reviewed the SRD and found that I was incorrect. Which makes me wonder how a party without a fire spell currently prepared is supposed to kill a troll, since the most common non-magic method is to beat it down, behead it, and apply a torch to the wound.

That's easier than you'd think. Torches are a copper each IIRC. To keep it KO'd until the fire kills it, just repeatedly coup de grace.

You can also pour a flask of lamp oil (1 silver) on the body and set it on fire. That should ignite the troll and keep it burning until it's dead.

[pwykersotz]

They surrender.

You sir, are awesome. :smallwink:

[Chronos]

Quoth Belial_the_Leveler:

Ways to kill the Tarrasque:

...
Dictum/Holy Word/Blasphemy/Word of Chaos of sufficient CL. Destroyed by saveless evocation not covered by its regeneration.
I was about to say that this doesn't work... But on checking the actual entry, the "insta-kills turn into a big pile of nonlethal damage" ability only applies to failing saves. So, kudos, that will in fact work, if you can pump your CL high enough.

[TuggyNE]

Whether or not hostile empathic transfer can land past its touch attack, empathic feedback works.


Effects that cause the opponent to make a saving throw are also considered attacks.

Only for purposes of spells and powers, not Ex abilities like Regeneration. Strange, isn't it?

[Psyren]

Only for purposes of spells and powers, not Ex abilities like Regeneration. Strange, isn't it?

HET is a power.

[TuggyNE]

HET is a power.

Indeed, and if HET had any text relating to the inability to make lethal attacks, that would actually be relevant. It doesn't, and it isn't: the important point is that the text in question ("No form of attack deals lethal damage to the tarrasque") is in an Ex ability, not a spell or power; as such, it does not and cannot use the definition of attack that spells use, so it falls back on the standard definition.

[Psyren]

Indeed, and if HET had any text relating to the inability to make lethal attacks, that would actually be relevant. It doesn't, and it isn't: the important point is that the text in question ("No form of attack deals lethal damage to the tarrasque") is in an Ex ability, not a spell or power; as such, it does not and cannot use the definition of attack that spells use, so it falls back on the standard definition.

I meant - HET is a power that forces a saving throw, therefore it is an attack.

[TuggyNE]

I meant - HET is a power that forces a saving throw, therefore it is an attack.

It would be for that reason, yes, except that as previously noted, that definition only applies to interactions specified in rules text contained in spells or powers. Since the interaction is not, the fallback is something like the glossary definition:
Any of numerous actions intended to harm, disable, or neutralize an opponent. The outcome of an attack is determined by an attack roll.

Now, given that the power has both a touch attack roll and a saving throw, you could make a pretty good argument that it's still an attack based on the attack roll (even though the outcome is not wholly determined by the attack roll). But not because it has a saving throw. :smallwink:

[SiuiS]

HET says regeneration does not "lessen or change it." But Big T's regen is special - it simply makes the lethal damage not happen. It's basically the mother of all replacement effects. It's not reducing the damage, and it's not converting it to anything else - there is simply no lethal damage at all.

No sir. All regeneration makes lethal damage not happen. That's what regeneration does. It then usually cites an exception; the tarrasque's regen does not have a native exception. An ability which says it bypasses regeneration will still do so, because it also bypasses the "cannot be bypassed" clause.

[TuggyNE]

No sir. All regeneration makes lethal damage not happen. That's what regeneration does. It then usually cites an exception; the tarrasque's regen does not have a native exception. An ability which says it bypasses regeneration will still do so, because it also bypasses the "cannot be bypassed" clause.

All the nitpicking Psyren and I have been doing about whether, or not, HET counts as an attack is pretty insignificant next to this, yeah.