Results 1 to 17 of 17
Thread: Shambling Mound?
-
2008-04-21, 12:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Location
Shambling Mound?
Simple question...hopefully. Is there any way to really counter the call lighting + shambling mound trick without banning either of the two?
-
2008-04-21, 01:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- *stab*
-
2008-04-21, 01:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
Re: Shambling Mound?
I'm sorry for my ignorance, but what does that trick consist of?
-
2008-04-21, 01:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- right behind you...
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
Now I've never heard of this trick before, so I checked the SRD for clues.
If I am correct, Shambling Mounds gain 1d4 con every time they get hit by an electric attack, meaning you could call lightning on them (which gives you 10, at max, electric attacks) to get them, at max per casting of call lightning, 10d4 con. So you are asking, "How can I prevent the players from abusing this?"
Simple, don't let it gain more than 1d4 con. If they hit it with more bolts, just have them do nothing. Or, don't let them gain 1d4 con from the first bolt either. I haven't read the entire description of shambling mounds, but last I checked, electricity does not make a plant grow at exponential rates.
Edit: If you're the player asking how to beat these things when the DM uses this trick, just kill/ stop the caster whose fixated on empowering his creature. If the shambling mound IS the caster (Druid using wild shape, Wizard using Polymorph/ Shape change)...
Run for the hills
and run for your life,
'cause as I can tell,
you're gonna die.
-
2008-04-21, 01:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
-
2008-04-21, 02:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Oregon, USA
Re: Shambling Mound?
I would view this as a case of "bonuses from the same source don't stack". That is, they get the better of the 1d4 or whatever Con bonus from electricity they already have, not they get another 1d4 every time they're hit. So you're talking +4 Con, max.
I'm not sure that's RAW-legal however; most of the stacking rules talk about magical effects and this particular ability is marked extraordinary.FeytouchedBanana eldritch disciple avatar by...me!
The Index of the Giant's Comments VI―Making Dogma from Zapped Bananas
-
2008-04-21, 02:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Soviet Canuckistan
Re: Shambling Mound?
As DM: change the rules. It's your game - it'd never fly in our games.
As for realism, I agree that it's not a realistic game, but I'd feel comfortable changing that feature without it affecting the flavour of the world. It's an unimportant and frankly idiotic little power. Make it water/light and it might be somewhat reasonable. No beating up plant badguys with blasts of light.
-
2008-04-21, 03:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Location
- Texas...for now
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
Honestly, just leave it. A summoned Mound won't last for long enough for it to matter, and a non-summoned one won't come up often enough for it to matter. It doesn't exactly break the game.
[/sarcasm]
FAQ is not RAW!Avatar by the incredible CrimsonAngel.
Saph:It's surprising how many problems can be solved by one druid spell combined with enough aggression.
I play primarily 3.5 D&D. Most of my advice will be based off of this. If my advice doesn't apply, specify a version in your post.
-
2008-04-21, 03:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Enterprise, Alabama
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
-
2008-04-21, 03:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Oregon, USA
Re: Shambling Mound?
FeytouchedBanana eldritch disciple avatar by...me!
The Index of the Giant's Comments VI―Making Dogma from Zapped Bananas
-
2008-04-21, 04:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- mother of all saints
-
2008-04-21, 10:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Koth
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
Agreed with obvious pun and Jasdoif; I also suggest just making the 1d4 Con increases overlap. So each time it gets hit by lightning, you roll the 1d4 again, and you use the higher one (and, technically, you keep track of the durations separately so if it gets 4 Con at time X, and 2 Con 30 min later, in another 30 min the 4 Con increase will lapse and 2 Con increase will take effect).
Seems appropriate enough. The point of the ability is to make the thing stronger if the PCs hit it with electricity, and that still works, but now you can't abuse it.Last edited by Tsotha-lanti; 2008-04-21 at 10:34 PM.
-
2008-04-21, 11:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Location
- The Land of Cleves
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
Way back in 2nd edition, I designed a druid for a high-power campaign who had his stronghold in the middle of a vast swamp. Except it wasn't actually a swamp; it was a shambling mound that had been hit with a truly obscene number of Call Lightnings. See, back then, electricity didn't give them bonus Con; it gave them full bonus HD, complete with increasing size.
Pity I never actually got powerful enough for that...Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
—As You Like It, III:ii:328
Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics
-
2008-04-21, 11:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
Re: Shambling Mound?
-
2008-04-23, 03:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
Re: Shambling Mound?
Hmmm... According to the SRD, only the best effect of two identical spells applies, and modifiers to a check or roll do not stack if they come from the same source, but neither of those seems to apply here. But it's obvious that the same basic restriction should apply, so just go ahead and rule that it does.
This may be a house rule. (I say "may be" because for all I know, there's a more general stacking rule somewhere that I just didn't find.) But there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing sacred about the RAW. In fact, often the RAW is really dumb. A DM should not have to dig up a RAW justification for disallowing broken stuff. In general, it should be assumed that if a rule or a given application of a rule is ridiculously overpowered, then it doesn't work as written, and the only question is whether it should be banned outright, and if not what sane modification of said rule should actually be used.
-
2008-04-23, 10:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: Shambling Mound?
DM: Ahem, just so you don't get any ideas, I'm ruling that every time a shambling mound gains constitution from electricity attacks there is a cumulative chance that the electricity shorts out its brain and causes it to go berserk and attack its creator. Do you still want to cast Call Lightning on it?
-
2008-04-23, 11:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Gender
Re: Shambling Mound?
Ala modern retellings of Frankenstein?