this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024

109 points (100.0% liked)

RPGMemes

251 readers

1 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Dalimey@ttrpg.network

moondog@ttrpg.network

109

I do not think any of you actually played 3.5 you praise so much (ttrpg.network)

submitted 7 months ago by TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.network to c/rpgmemes@ttrpg.network

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

3.5 was edition I played the most. It was a reason why I quit RPGs for nearly a decade because I hated it so much.

Every time I see another meme about how amazing 3.5 Tarrasque is, I remmember how amogn actual 3.5 players Tarrasque was the biggest joke. It was always brought up as definite proof designers have no idea how to make good monster. It was laughably easy to beat. A wizard could casually solo it, the same abilities people now miss in 3.5 amounted to ribbons. It was a laughingstock, forums had 100+ pages discussions how to fix it and general consensus was it';s beyond saving. It was first proof in 3.5 if you cannot use magic you're only good to roll over and die.

I honestly don't know if everyone claiming 3.5 Tarrasque is such a horrifying monster are trying to rewrite history or unintentionally proving what a broken, unplayable pile of garbage 3.5 was, if it's biggest punching bag is actually dangerous in a different, better designed game.

top 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

i can also confirm that the tarrasque was pretty universally clowned on for being easy in 3.5e. That discussion is basically what drove the whole "town built around the tarrasque" idea on the wizard forums and enworld. That said, it's probably not as bad as the 5e tarrasque by comparison

[–] MouseKeyboard@ttrpg.network 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

the whole “town built around the tarrasque” idea

The what?

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 4 points 7 months ago

in 3e, the tarrasque had regeneration, and couldnt die from negative HP. So the idea of building a town that "farmed" an unconscious tarrasque for its meat/bones/whatever was a popular thought experiment for a setting back in the day. IIRC there was also someone who took the idea and published it as an actual book at some point too (which honestly felt kinda scummy to me, since it was basically a big community project/collaboration)

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 10 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Could you give examples? I never heard of it being easy to beat, and I would love a laugh at it being easily handled

[–] enfluensa@ttrpg.network 13 points 7 months ago

The big one was its complete lack of mobility abilities or ranged attacks, so a party with overland flight could attack it pretty much with impunity. Iirc that was most commonly paired with shrinking a bunch of boulders, carrying them up with you, then dropping them right as the shrinking spell expired. This is all from memory 15 years ago though so details could be a bit sketchy.

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

the usual go to back in the day was to drown it, because it wasnt immune to that in any way. Simply gate it to the plane of water. There was a number of other work arounds like that too.

[–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Killing it by banishing it to another dimension of reality sounds like the epic, high level stuff the Terrasque was made for

[–] eerongal@ttrpg.network 4 points 7 months ago

i mean, there were plenty of other ways, including things you could do at lower level, that was just the common go to because it required a single high level spell, and usually you fought big T at high level.

[–] krellor@fedia.io 7 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Yeah, I ran campaigns from first through 3.5, never really played 4th or 5th. I'm curious how 3.5 tarrasque is easy to beat with anything other than broken munchkin builds from conflicting source materials that no sane DM would allow, or would be reserved for epic level campaigns. Like sure, when you get to a point where you can casually cast things like hellball, then things like the tarrasque might be easy. But at that point you will be doing the tango with the outer realm creatures and Demi gods.

load more comments (7 replies)

[–] maquise@ttrpg.network 6 points 7 months ago (8 children)

I remember the go to strategy being to summon an Alip, an incorporeal undead that can drain strength without needing a save.

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] Brutticus@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I play 3.5 for a few years. One of my groups swore by it. It was... textured. When you call it a steaming pile of shit, I see your point and honestly agree with you. But I will say it was... completely what it was. It wasn't well designed, but it was immensely interesting. 5e is all of 3.x, but with the interesting parts sanded down. In my estimation, that makes 5e the lesser game.

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 5 points 7 months ago

3.5e just had some much room to explore. Yeah, some parts sucked or didn't make sense, but I think that really led to some interesting characters and fun moments in games. I haven't played 5e much precisely because it's so smooth in comparison.

[–] figjam@midwest.social 6 points 7 months ago

I think what they want is something to be a little afraid of. Yes, the beast as written is easy to kill for the creative but for some dorks it was scary because it existed.

[–] BewitchedBargain@reddthat.com 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The Tarrasque is a flawed creature in all editions. In case of 1e/2e, it's not immune to being stunned or being paralyzed (e.g. Hold Person), giving the party a good chance to exploit its vulnerable period. Later editions have other flaws, most of which can be fixed by giving the Tarrasque a ranged attack (similar to Godzilla, etc.)

The flaws in 3.5e actually involve power scale. There's combinations of abilities that are incredibly powerful, resulting in characters that are pre-planned rather than organically grown - and also meant that some classes were inherently better than others. At the same time, there were feat taxes that were essential for almost any character, which would be cutting into abilities that would be normal.

However, I'd be comparing 3.5e to Basic D&D. In this case, I'd most likely prefer 3.5e, simply because it's more flexible compared to the rigid use of Basic's weapons, but I instead skipped past that and went to both 4e and/or Pathfinder.

[–] ahdok@ttrpg.network 2 points 7 months ago

Eh, it's a playable fight in 4e. The biggest flaw there is it's not particularly exciting as an encounter.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I've only played 2, 3 and 3.5. Read the rules for 4 when it came out and was not impressed in the slightest, and neither was anyone else in my group. Haven't even bothered with 5 except in the case of BG3 which uses it so I don't know if it's as simplified as 4 or if the simplicity was simply the video game format.

We never used a terrasque and it's not like I read every monster manual cover to cover. I'd skim through, see a cool picture and if the description of it was cool enough, I'd use it. The terrasque didn't pique my interest by its appearance so I never read anything else about it. I'm a huge fan of Modons though. Fuck yeah! Shapes!