D&D 3.5 Ice Cactus Monster

[Lyuketsu]

Hi all,

I have made a new monster that i am planning to have my party fight pretty soon. As i'm pretty new to DM'ing, i was hoping someone could help me out with some questions.

Here is the creature stats (I wrote these up myself):

Ice Cactus
Huge Plant (Cold)
Hit Dice: 10d8+70 (115 hp)
Initiative: -1
Speed: 20 ft, 30 on ice/snow
AC: 20 (-2 size, +12 natural) T 8 FF 20
BAB/ Grapple: +7/+24
Attack: Slam +14 (2d6+9)
Full Attack: 4 Slam +14 (3d6+9)
Space/ Reach: 15 ft/ 15 ft
Special Attacks: Improved Grab, Constrict 2d6+9, Spores
Special Qualities: Plant Traits, Blindsense 60 ft, Immunity to Cold, Weakness to Fire, DR 5/slashing
Saves: Fort +14, Ref +2, Will +4
Abilities: Str 28, Dex 8, Con 25, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 12
Skills: +9 Listen, +8 Spot
Feats: Improved Natural Attack, Combat Reflexes, Alertness, Improved Natural Armour
Environment: Cold Mountains, Cold Plains
Organization: Solitary
Challenge Rating: 7
Treasure: Standard (non-organic matter only)
Alignment: Neutral

This enormous blue and purple cactus seems out of place in the snowy environment in which it is found. It appears not to move, even with gale force winds unable to sway it, despite its height. When curious creatures come too close, however, 4 large tendrils swing out from the colourful “head” and lash out trying to pull in its prey. Tiny spores fly out of the “head” portion of the creature that embed themselves in the flesh of living creatures like icicles.

This creature can sense the world around it, despite not having any sensory organs. It is intelligent enough to know when it is outnumbered, and thus will not attack large groups, unless accompanied by another of its species. When on ice and snow, it can remove its roots from the ground and effectively “slide” along the surface to escape.

When this creature kills all of its prey, it uses its tendrils to pick up the creature/s and place them at its base, allowing its roots to begin absorbing any organic matter for nutrients. Any inorganic material, such as metal weapons, armour and most magical items, get entangled in its root system, and gets carried around with it. If it is slain, it collapses on itself, as if it was hollow, and a search (DC 20) will reveal the items that it has picked up over its lifetime.
Combat
This creature attacks with its tendrils in an attempt to either kill the creature outright, or to snatch them up and constrict them until they are dead and can be eaten.
Improved Grab (Ex): Whenever this creature makes a successful melee attack with its tendrils, it can attempt to initiate a grapple without provoking an attack of opportunity. It can do this with each individual tendril. Once grappled, the creature Constricts its prey.
Constrict (Ex): When this creature has a Large or smaller creature grappled, it can constrict it for 2d6+8 points of damage.
Spore (Ex): This creature can release spores in a 15 ft radius around it at will; it can release a second dose of spores 1d4+1 rounds after the initial release. These spores embed themselves in the flesh of living creatures and expand as they freeze instantly, doing 1d6+2 damage per round. The spores melt after 1d4+2 rounds.

I have play-tested this creature against a standard level 5 party (as recommended in the Monster Manual), and it was defeated with some difficulty, with an average of 1 party member falling unconscious.

My first question is whether this, or any creature, can have both a Plant and an Aberration type, as well as it's cold subtype?
Alternatively, can this creature have the Aberration type (as it is technically an Aberration), but keep the plant traits as it is still a plant?

Thanks ahead of time :smallsmile:

[aimlessPolymath]

Honestly, you could probably just make it a straight Plant(Cold) mechanically, and call it an aberration for naming reasons. The Aberration type doesn't give anything special, and for the purposes of most things that care about type (Favored enemy), it feels closer to a Plant from the description. What about it is aberrant?

If you wanted, you could give it an ability like

Mutant (or whatever you call it): For the purposes of abilities which care about type, a Ice Cactus is treated as both a plant and an aberration simultaneously.

[rferries]

Yeah, or "Aberration-Blood" or the like. Note that the pre-existing Plant creatures are already pretty bizarre so I don't think involving Aberrations is necessary (apart from flavour reasons on your part).

[Darth Ultron]

Aberration is ''it's does not fit anywhere else''. So, if it's a plant, it is a Plant. No need for anything else.

''Ice Cactus'' does not exactly fit. It's an ''ok vague name''

It's really not worth it to say ''it has no sensory organs'' as, well, it ''must'' have something to sense the world. Blindsense is an extraordinary ability, not a magical one.

''Spores'' is not exactly the right word for ''something released from a cactus''. ''Spines'' grow on Cacti. So it would be more of a ''cloud of shape spines''.

[rferries]

I do think it's a very creative creature, though! :)

[Lyuketsu]

Honestly, you could probably just make it a straight Plant(Cold) mechanically, and call it an aberration for naming reasons. The Aberration type doesn't give anything special, and for the purposes of most things that care about type (Favored enemy), it feels closer to a Plant from the description. What about it is aberrant?

The main reason i thought the Aberration type because it has a very decent INT, WIS, and CHA which is very unusual for plants, that would have been a result of a wizard doing some sort of experiment with plants; this was in order to make it a cunning predator, rather than a creature that reacts to stimuli, but i guess it could just be a smart plant.


Mutant (or whatever you call it): For the purposes of abilities which care about type, a Ice Cactus is treated as both a plant and an aberration simultaneously.

This will probably be more fitting, and i could have a limit on that to make sure that rangers can't stack their bonuses for example.


''Ice Cactus'' does not exactly fit. It's an ''ok vague name''

Yeah i'm not great with naming things, so this was just a vague name placeholder while i came up with another one :P


It's really not worth it to say ''it has no sensory organs'' as, well, it ''must'' have something to sense the world. Blindsense is an extraordinary ability, not a magical one.

Okay, i didn't actually realise it wasn't a supernatural ability, so it should be, "no visible sensory organs."


''Spores'' is not exactly the right word for ''something released from a cactus''. ''Spines'' grow on Cacti. So it would be more of a ''cloud of shape spines''.

Now that you have said it, i see that you are correct. i hadn't really even thought of that distinction until now. i modeled this on the Vrock spore ability so i just used the word "spores."

After having had this in my campaign against an actual party, i have to say that this thing should be bumped at least 2 CR because it is so powerful with all the things put together.

Thanks for your help guys. I would imagine this build would work for most other elements with a few minor tweaks.

If anyone is interested, i can post the updated version here for people to use. :smallsmile:

[Debihuman]

Since this is a base creature, the feats improved natural attack and improved natural armor don't do anything for it. I recommend giving it feats that are useful. You can give base monsters whatever Natural Armor you choose and because it is Huge, it should have 2d6 for it's damage. That's standard slam damage for a Huge creature.

I would give it Alertness, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Awesome Blow as its feats. Awesome Blow is good for knocking back attacking creatures.

Otherwise it looks good.

Debby
I'm a bit behind on critiquing monsters. I hope this one isn't too old.

[rferries]

Since this is a base creature, the feats improved natural attack and improved natural armor don't do anything for it. I recommend giving it feats that are useful. You can give base monsters whatever Natural Armor you choose and because it is Huge, it should have 2d6 for it's damage. That's standard slam damage for a Huge creature.

I would give it Alertness, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Awesome Blow as its feats. Awesome Blow is good for knocking back attacking creatures.

Otherwise it looks good.

Debby
I'm a bit behind on critiquing monsters. I hope this one isn't too old.

I really, really wish they had standardised all monsters in the 3.5. beastiary so that there was a given damage for a particular type of natural attack from a creature of a particular size, and any creature that dealt more damage (e.g. as a holdover from earlier editions) was given Improved Natural Attack as a (bonus) feat. Some monsters use the feat or adhere to the standard damage die (tigers etc), but outsiders etc are all over the map with their attacks.

[Debihuman]

I really, really wish they had standardised all monsters in the 3.5. beastiary so that there was a given damage for a particular type of natural attack from a creature of a particular size, and any creature that dealt more damage (e.g. as a holdover from earlier editions) was given Improved Natural Attack as a (bonus) feat. Some monsters use the feat or adhere to the standard damage die (tigers etc), but outsiders etc are all over the map with their attacks.

I think they just wrote monsters by throwing things at a dart board on some days. Also, WotC had TERRIBLE (really really terrible) editors and proofreaders and the rules aren't actually codified so you find them all over the place. I think the reason that normal animals often have Improved Natural Attack as a bonus feat is to keep them from gaining the feat later when they go up in size. It's sorta a wasted feat to prevent power creep. It's one of those weird situations.

Tiger claws do 1d8 points of damage while a lion's claws do 1d4 points of damage. Both are Large. A Leopard is Medium size and its claws do 1d3 points of damage. Going up a size should be 1d3<1d4 for Large claws and Improved Natural Attack would bring it to 1d6. Not sure why Tiger claws went up a size from 1d6 to 1d8. I would guess that somebody looked at different rules. Large dragon claws do 1d8 so maybe someone looked at that instead. Who knows what those guys were thinking.

I tend to steal from Pathfinder rules because those are mostly compatible and the natural attacks are codified under Universal Monster Rules. You can scroll down to Natural Attacks See here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/bestiary/universalMonsterRules.html

I hope this helps.

Debby

[rferries]

I think they just wrote monsters by throwing things at a dart board on some days. Also, WotC had TERRIBLE (really really terrible) editors and proofreaders and the rules aren't actually codified so you find them all over the place. I think the reason that normal animals often have Improved Natural Attack as a bonus feat is to keep them from gaining the feat later when they go up in size. It's sorta a wasted feat to prevent power creep. It's one of those weird situations.

Tiger claws do 1d8 points of damage while a lion's claws do 1d4 points of damage. Both are Large. A Leopard is Medium size and its claws do 1d3 points of damage. Going up a size should be 1d3<1d4 for Large claws and Improved Natural Attack would bring it to 1d6. Not sure why Tiger claws went up a size from 1d6 to 1d8. I would guess that somebody looked at different rules. Large dragon claws do 1d8 so maybe someone looked at that instead. Who knows what those guys were thinking.

I tend to steal from Pathfinder rules because those are mostly compatible and the natural attacks are codified under Universal Monster Rules. You can scroll down to Natural Attacks See here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/bestiary/universalMonsterRules.html

I hope this helps.

Debby

Ha! What a convoluted solution they made for themselves. :D

Oh that link is perfect! Will definitely use it from now on, thanks.