Mixing
Modifying a Zombie to be Zombified due to disease rather than Being undead
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In the MM page 316 a zombie has the following special trait:
Undead Fortitude: If damage reduces the zombie to 0 Hit Points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5+the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.
I am running a campaign with a disease that makes humanoids become mindless zombie-esque creatures. However they are not undead, they can be cured and returned to their original selves.
Due to the nature of my zombies, them being particularly affected by "radiant damage" makes no sense. However if I remove the "radiant damage" part of this special trait I think the zombies will be far too powerful against my 3 lvl 1 PCs. What could I replace the "radiant damage" part of the trait with that will make more thematic sense and still be intuitive to the players? The list of damage types in the DMG doesn't really include a type that makes sense against a diseased creature. Or should I just make it fire damage or something to allow for some fun role play without worrying about it "making sense"?
dnd-5e monsters damage-types disease zombies
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In the MM page 316 a zombie has the following special trait:
Undead Fortitude: If damage reduces the zombie to 0 Hit Points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5+the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.
I am running a campaign with a disease that makes humanoids become mindless zombie-esque creatures. However they are not undead, they can be cured and returned to their original selves.
Due to the nature of my zombies, them being particularly affected by "radiant damage" makes no sense. However if I remove the "radiant damage" part of this special trait I think the zombies will be far too powerful against my 3 lvl 1 PCs. What could I replace the "radiant damage" part of the trait with that will make more thematic sense and still be intuitive to the players? The list of damage types in the DMG doesn't really include a type that makes sense against a diseased creature. Or should I just make it fire damage or something to allow for some fun role play without worrying about it "making sense"?
dnd-5e monsters damage-types disease zombies
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
In the MM page 316 a zombie has the following special trait:
Undead Fortitude: If damage reduces the zombie to 0 Hit Points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5+the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.
I am running a campaign with a disease that makes humanoids become mindless zombie-esque creatures. However they are not undead, they can be cured and returned to their original selves.
Due to the nature of my zombies, them being particularly affected by "radiant damage" makes no sense. However if I remove the "radiant damage" part of this special trait I think the zombies will be far too powerful against my 3 lvl 1 PCs. What could I replace the "radiant damage" part of the trait with that will make more thematic sense and still be intuitive to the players? The list of damage types in the DMG doesn't really include a type that makes sense against a diseased creature. Or should I just make it fire damage or something to allow for some fun role play without worrying about it "making sense"?
dnd-5e monsters damage-types disease zombies
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
In the MM page 316 a zombie has the following special trait:
Undead Fortitude: If damage reduces the zombie to 0 Hit Points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5+the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.
I am running a campaign with a disease that makes humanoids become mindless zombie-esque creatures. However they are not undead, they can be cured and returned to their original selves.
Due to the nature of my zombies, them being particularly affected by "radiant damage" makes no sense. However if I remove the "radiant damage" part of this special trait I think the zombies will be far too powerful against my 3 lvl 1 PCs. What could I replace the "radiant damage" part of the trait with that will make more thematic sense and still be intuitive to the players? The list of damage types in the DMG doesn't really include a type that makes sense against a diseased creature. Or should I just make it fire damage or something to allow for some fun role play without worrying about it "making sense"?
dnd-5e monsters damage-types disease zombies
dnd-5e monsters damage-types disease zombies
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
asked 33 mins ago
MooseBoost
316
316
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
MooseBoost is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
It's not terribly unbalanced to let your zombies have undead fortitude minus radiant damage exclusion. In fact, many teams have no way to deal radiant damage and can kill zombies just fine. If you really want to have a specific kind of damage take radiant's place, it will depend on how your zombification works:
- If they are decaying while zombified, necrotic is a good option (accelerating decomposition)
- If the disease is akin to a parasite, fire would make sense (burning the disease, in fact)
- If the nervous system is still the main controller of the zombies, lightning would be suited (short-circuit, in a way)
Just decide, or think about, how your zombie-disease works. Especially if this is going to be a recurrent trait in many monsters, not just in the relatively weak zombies. If you just decide fire damage is apt and you have a wizard, his cones of fire and firebolt will be way more effective than your other player's tools (though it's the same with clerics and paladins in normal undead campaigns, so you could be fine with it).
It would make sense if the way to kill them and the way to cure them is related. In general, try to have a reason for every design choice, having a consistent world is better for your players (since they can make deductions, they could discover cold is what cures zombies and thus deduce freezing them kills them easier) and for you (since you don't have to keep track of a bunch of unrelated rules without cohesion).
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
It's not terribly unbalanced to let your zombies have undead fortitude minus radiant damage exclusion. In fact, many teams have no way to deal radiant damage and can kill zombies just fine. If you really want to have a specific kind of damage take radiant's place, it will depend on how your zombification works:
- If they are decaying while zombified, necrotic is a good option (accelerating decomposition)
- If the disease is akin to a parasite, fire would make sense (burning the disease, in fact)
- If the nervous system is still the main controller of the zombies, lightning would be suited (short-circuit, in a way)
Just decide, or think about, how your zombie-disease works. Especially if this is going to be a recurrent trait in many monsters, not just in the relatively weak zombies. If you just decide fire damage is apt and you have a wizard, his cones of fire and firebolt will be way more effective than your other player's tools (though it's the same with clerics and paladins in normal undead campaigns, so you could be fine with it).
It would make sense if the way to kill them and the way to cure them is related. In general, try to have a reason for every design choice, having a consistent world is better for your players (since they can make deductions, they could discover cold is what cures zombies and thus deduce freezing them kills them easier) and for you (since you don't have to keep track of a bunch of unrelated rules without cohesion).
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
It's not terribly unbalanced to let your zombies have undead fortitude minus radiant damage exclusion. In fact, many teams have no way to deal radiant damage and can kill zombies just fine. If you really want to have a specific kind of damage take radiant's place, it will depend on how your zombification works:
- If they are decaying while zombified, necrotic is a good option (accelerating decomposition)
- If the disease is akin to a parasite, fire would make sense (burning the disease, in fact)
- If the nervous system is still the main controller of the zombies, lightning would be suited (short-circuit, in a way)
Just decide, or think about, how your zombie-disease works. Especially if this is going to be a recurrent trait in many monsters, not just in the relatively weak zombies. If you just decide fire damage is apt and you have a wizard, his cones of fire and firebolt will be way more effective than your other player's tools (though it's the same with clerics and paladins in normal undead campaigns, so you could be fine with it).
It would make sense if the way to kill them and the way to cure them is related. In general, try to have a reason for every design choice, having a consistent world is better for your players (since they can make deductions, they could discover cold is what cures zombies and thus deduce freezing them kills them easier) and for you (since you don't have to keep track of a bunch of unrelated rules without cohesion).
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
It's not terribly unbalanced to let your zombies have undead fortitude minus radiant damage exclusion. In fact, many teams have no way to deal radiant damage and can kill zombies just fine. If you really want to have a specific kind of damage take radiant's place, it will depend on how your zombification works:
- If they are decaying while zombified, necrotic is a good option (accelerating decomposition)
- If the disease is akin to a parasite, fire would make sense (burning the disease, in fact)
- If the nervous system is still the main controller of the zombies, lightning would be suited (short-circuit, in a way)
Just decide, or think about, how your zombie-disease works. Especially if this is going to be a recurrent trait in many monsters, not just in the relatively weak zombies. If you just decide fire damage is apt and you have a wizard, his cones of fire and firebolt will be way more effective than your other player's tools (though it's the same with clerics and paladins in normal undead campaigns, so you could be fine with it).
It would make sense if the way to kill them and the way to cure them is related. In general, try to have a reason for every design choice, having a consistent world is better for your players (since they can make deductions, they could discover cold is what cures zombies and thus deduce freezing them kills them easier) and for you (since you don't have to keep track of a bunch of unrelated rules without cohesion).
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
It's not terribly unbalanced to let your zombies have undead fortitude minus radiant damage exclusion. In fact, many teams have no way to deal radiant damage and can kill zombies just fine. If you really want to have a specific kind of damage take radiant's place, it will depend on how your zombification works:
- If they are decaying while zombified, necrotic is a good option (accelerating decomposition)
- If the disease is akin to a parasite, fire would make sense (burning the disease, in fact)
- If the nervous system is still the main controller of the zombies, lightning would be suited (short-circuit, in a way)
Just decide, or think about, how your zombie-disease works. Especially if this is going to be a recurrent trait in many monsters, not just in the relatively weak zombies. If you just decide fire damage is apt and you have a wizard, his cones of fire and firebolt will be way more effective than your other player's tools (though it's the same with clerics and paladins in normal undead campaigns, so you could be fine with it).
It would make sense if the way to kill them and the way to cure them is related. In general, try to have a reason for every design choice, having a consistent world is better for your players (since they can make deductions, they could discover cold is what cures zombies and thus deduce freezing them kills them easier) and for you (since you don't have to keep track of a bunch of unrelated rules without cohesion).
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
answered 19 mins ago
LordHieros
2,173722
2,173722
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
1
1
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
That's a very good point. I hadn't properly thought of how the disease works yet. I know it starts spreading because it is released in grain by a rival merchant. So having it be something like flour beetles that were only meant to eat the grain but turned out to be parasites would make sense. A rival merchant turning everyone to zombies to get a competitive edge seems a little extreme so that solves two problems. Thanks for the answer.
– MooseBoost
13 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
Thanks for accepting, but usually here we try to not accept the answers until 24 hours have passed so other people are not discouraged to post their own answers. I'm glad you liked my answer, and you're welcome.
– LordHieros
12 mins ago
add a comment |Â
MooseBoost is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MooseBoost is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MooseBoost is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
MooseBoost is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132592%2fmodifying-a-zombie-to-be-zombified-due-to-disease-rather-than-being-undead%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
