Mixing
What damage type vulnerability makes sense for disease-based Zombies rather than being undead?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
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.
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.
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 three level 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 homebrew damage-types zombies
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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
6
down vote
favorite
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.
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.
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 three level 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 homebrew damage-types zombies
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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.
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
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.
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.
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 three level 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 homebrew damage-types zombies
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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.
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.
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.
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 three level 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 homebrew damage-types zombies
dnd-5e monsters homebrew damage-types zombies
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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.
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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.
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
edited 13 mins ago
SevenSidedDie♦
199k25633916
199k25633916
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
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 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
asked 3 hours ago
MooseBoost
576
576
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.
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
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 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
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
3 hours ago
2
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
3 hours ago
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
If your 'zombies' are not truly undead, do they need the Undead Fortitude trait at all?
The zombies which appear in the Monster Manual are shambling corpses, bearing old wounds and rotting where they stand. Narratively, the Undead Fortitude trait represents a zombie simply not caring about a wound it received, because it doesn't need that organ you just impaled on your shortsword. A lucky zombie which passes multiple Undead Fortitude checks would have bits falling off and large chunks of flesh missing; injuries that would kill any living creature but aren't a big deal to zombies.
If your zombies aren't actually dead and can still be cured (I assume you mean by methods short of Raise Dead), then shrugging off organs being impaled and limbs being lopped off is far-fetched.
Consider removing the Undead Fortitude trait altogether for your zombies. If you feel this makes the zombies too weak, you can increase the hit points to compensate.
Since your zombies are disease-based, consider making this disease contagious, and thus give your zombies a trait more fitting to your campaign. Give them a Bite attack like that possessed by the Diseased Giant Rat (MM p.327, sidebar), except with your zombie disease instead of the giant rat's disease. If you fear that this might be too dangerous, you can make it so that the Bite attack can only be used on a creature grappled by the zombie, as for a Vampire. You could also make it so that the zombie can use its slam attack to grapple an opponent rather than deal damage (as a Vampire can). Since zombies don't have multiattack, this gives your players one round to try and break free from the zombie's grasp, which sounds like a dramatic moment which your players may remember for a while.
You could make the onset time for the disease sufficiently long that the party has enough time to race to discover a cure to save their ailing comrade, at your discretion. Even if the onset time is relatively short, the party could still try to cure their zombified friends. This may enrich your story opportunities. (Sample Diseases in DMG p.256)
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider sticking with radiant damage, but for a different reason
One option you might consider is keeping radiant as the the disease-zombies' fortitude-suppressing damage type, but giving a different justification. Perhaps the disease makes them extremely sensitive to bright light. Direct sunlight isn't quite powerful enough to do more than give them a quick sunburn, but focused radiant damage definitely hurts. There is definitely precedent for such vulnerability in many zombie stories.
In fact, you might take it even farther and say that direct sunlight also suppresses their fortitude trait, making them easier to kill during the day. Or maybe sunlight even does 1 radiant damage per round, making the zombies effectively nocturnal, with a need to hide in shelter or underground during the day. You can use this to present the players with interesting strategic choices and elevate the tension, such as: should the party attack now, in the middle of the night, or should they try to hold out until morning?
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
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 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
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
3 hours ago
2
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
3 hours ago
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
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 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
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
3 hours ago
2
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
3 hours ago
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
11
down vote
up vote
11
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 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
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 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
answered 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
answered 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
answered 3 hours ago
LordHieros
2,233723
2,233723
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
3 hours ago
2
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
3 hours ago
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours 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
3 hours ago
2
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
3 hours ago
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours 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
3 hours 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
3 hours ago
2
2
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
3 hours 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
3 hours ago
1
1
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours ago
Psychic damage would be even better than lightning for resetting the brain.
– T.J.L.
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
If your 'zombies' are not truly undead, do they need the Undead Fortitude trait at all?
The zombies which appear in the Monster Manual are shambling corpses, bearing old wounds and rotting where they stand. Narratively, the Undead Fortitude trait represents a zombie simply not caring about a wound it received, because it doesn't need that organ you just impaled on your shortsword. A lucky zombie which passes multiple Undead Fortitude checks would have bits falling off and large chunks of flesh missing; injuries that would kill any living creature but aren't a big deal to zombies.
If your zombies aren't actually dead and can still be cured (I assume you mean by methods short of Raise Dead), then shrugging off organs being impaled and limbs being lopped off is far-fetched.
Consider removing the Undead Fortitude trait altogether for your zombies. If you feel this makes the zombies too weak, you can increase the hit points to compensate.
Since your zombies are disease-based, consider making this disease contagious, and thus give your zombies a trait more fitting to your campaign. Give them a Bite attack like that possessed by the Diseased Giant Rat (MM p.327, sidebar), except with your zombie disease instead of the giant rat's disease. If you fear that this might be too dangerous, you can make it so that the Bite attack can only be used on a creature grappled by the zombie, as for a Vampire. You could also make it so that the zombie can use its slam attack to grapple an opponent rather than deal damage (as a Vampire can). Since zombies don't have multiattack, this gives your players one round to try and break free from the zombie's grasp, which sounds like a dramatic moment which your players may remember for a while.
You could make the onset time for the disease sufficiently long that the party has enough time to race to discover a cure to save their ailing comrade, at your discretion. Even if the onset time is relatively short, the party could still try to cure their zombified friends. This may enrich your story opportunities. (Sample Diseases in DMG p.256)
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
If your 'zombies' are not truly undead, do they need the Undead Fortitude trait at all?
The zombies which appear in the Monster Manual are shambling corpses, bearing old wounds and rotting where they stand. Narratively, the Undead Fortitude trait represents a zombie simply not caring about a wound it received, because it doesn't need that organ you just impaled on your shortsword. A lucky zombie which passes multiple Undead Fortitude checks would have bits falling off and large chunks of flesh missing; injuries that would kill any living creature but aren't a big deal to zombies.
If your zombies aren't actually dead and can still be cured (I assume you mean by methods short of Raise Dead), then shrugging off organs being impaled and limbs being lopped off is far-fetched.
Consider removing the Undead Fortitude trait altogether for your zombies. If you feel this makes the zombies too weak, you can increase the hit points to compensate.
Since your zombies are disease-based, consider making this disease contagious, and thus give your zombies a trait more fitting to your campaign. Give them a Bite attack like that possessed by the Diseased Giant Rat (MM p.327, sidebar), except with your zombie disease instead of the giant rat's disease. If you fear that this might be too dangerous, you can make it so that the Bite attack can only be used on a creature grappled by the zombie, as for a Vampire. You could also make it so that the zombie can use its slam attack to grapple an opponent rather than deal damage (as a Vampire can). Since zombies don't have multiattack, this gives your players one round to try and break free from the zombie's grasp, which sounds like a dramatic moment which your players may remember for a while.
You could make the onset time for the disease sufficiently long that the party has enough time to race to discover a cure to save their ailing comrade, at your discretion. Even if the onset time is relatively short, the party could still try to cure their zombified friends. This may enrich your story opportunities. (Sample Diseases in DMG p.256)
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
If your 'zombies' are not truly undead, do they need the Undead Fortitude trait at all?
The zombies which appear in the Monster Manual are shambling corpses, bearing old wounds and rotting where they stand. Narratively, the Undead Fortitude trait represents a zombie simply not caring about a wound it received, because it doesn't need that organ you just impaled on your shortsword. A lucky zombie which passes multiple Undead Fortitude checks would have bits falling off and large chunks of flesh missing; injuries that would kill any living creature but aren't a big deal to zombies.
If your zombies aren't actually dead and can still be cured (I assume you mean by methods short of Raise Dead), then shrugging off organs being impaled and limbs being lopped off is far-fetched.
Consider removing the Undead Fortitude trait altogether for your zombies. If you feel this makes the zombies too weak, you can increase the hit points to compensate.
Since your zombies are disease-based, consider making this disease contagious, and thus give your zombies a trait more fitting to your campaign. Give them a Bite attack like that possessed by the Diseased Giant Rat (MM p.327, sidebar), except with your zombie disease instead of the giant rat's disease. If you fear that this might be too dangerous, you can make it so that the Bite attack can only be used on a creature grappled by the zombie, as for a Vampire. You could also make it so that the zombie can use its slam attack to grapple an opponent rather than deal damage (as a Vampire can). Since zombies don't have multiattack, this gives your players one round to try and break free from the zombie's grasp, which sounds like a dramatic moment which your players may remember for a while.
You could make the onset time for the disease sufficiently long that the party has enough time to race to discover a cure to save their ailing comrade, at your discretion. Even if the onset time is relatively short, the party could still try to cure their zombified friends. This may enrich your story opportunities. (Sample Diseases in DMG p.256)
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
If your 'zombies' are not truly undead, do they need the Undead Fortitude trait at all?
The zombies which appear in the Monster Manual are shambling corpses, bearing old wounds and rotting where they stand. Narratively, the Undead Fortitude trait represents a zombie simply not caring about a wound it received, because it doesn't need that organ you just impaled on your shortsword. A lucky zombie which passes multiple Undead Fortitude checks would have bits falling off and large chunks of flesh missing; injuries that would kill any living creature but aren't a big deal to zombies.
If your zombies aren't actually dead and can still be cured (I assume you mean by methods short of Raise Dead), then shrugging off organs being impaled and limbs being lopped off is far-fetched.
Consider removing the Undead Fortitude trait altogether for your zombies. If you feel this makes the zombies too weak, you can increase the hit points to compensate.
Since your zombies are disease-based, consider making this disease contagious, and thus give your zombies a trait more fitting to your campaign. Give them a Bite attack like that possessed by the Diseased Giant Rat (MM p.327, sidebar), except with your zombie disease instead of the giant rat's disease. If you fear that this might be too dangerous, you can make it so that the Bite attack can only be used on a creature grappled by the zombie, as for a Vampire. You could also make it so that the zombie can use its slam attack to grapple an opponent rather than deal damage (as a Vampire can). Since zombies don't have multiattack, this gives your players one round to try and break free from the zombie's grasp, which sounds like a dramatic moment which your players may remember for a while.
You could make the onset time for the disease sufficiently long that the party has enough time to race to discover a cure to save their ailing comrade, at your discretion. Even if the onset time is relatively short, the party could still try to cure their zombified friends. This may enrich your story opportunities. (Sample Diseases in DMG p.256)
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
answered 2 hours ago
BBeast
994
994
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
BBeast is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
We had a DM do something very much like this (we eventually surmised that he was copying the walking dead TV show) in terms of the zombie affliction being contagious. Unfortunately, I can't offer you an add on for your answer since that campaign ended due to RL.
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
@KorvinStarmast similar influence with me. I've been playing pandemic the board game with the group I am DMing for, I thought it would be fun to continue the theme, and whats better than a walking dead style plague as the disease.
– MooseBoost
1 min ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider sticking with radiant damage, but for a different reason
One option you might consider is keeping radiant as the the disease-zombies' fortitude-suppressing damage type, but giving a different justification. Perhaps the disease makes them extremely sensitive to bright light. Direct sunlight isn't quite powerful enough to do more than give them a quick sunburn, but focused radiant damage definitely hurts. There is definitely precedent for such vulnerability in many zombie stories.
In fact, you might take it even farther and say that direct sunlight also suppresses their fortitude trait, making them easier to kill during the day. Or maybe sunlight even does 1 radiant damage per round, making the zombies effectively nocturnal, with a need to hide in shelter or underground during the day. You can use this to present the players with interesting strategic choices and elevate the tension, such as: should the party attack now, in the middle of the night, or should they try to hold out until morning?
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Consider sticking with radiant damage, but for a different reason
One option you might consider is keeping radiant as the the disease-zombies' fortitude-suppressing damage type, but giving a different justification. Perhaps the disease makes them extremely sensitive to bright light. Direct sunlight isn't quite powerful enough to do more than give them a quick sunburn, but focused radiant damage definitely hurts. There is definitely precedent for such vulnerability in many zombie stories.
In fact, you might take it even farther and say that direct sunlight also suppresses their fortitude trait, making them easier to kill during the day. Or maybe sunlight even does 1 radiant damage per round, making the zombies effectively nocturnal, with a need to hide in shelter or underground during the day. You can use this to present the players with interesting strategic choices and elevate the tension, such as: should the party attack now, in the middle of the night, or should they try to hold out until morning?
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Consider sticking with radiant damage, but for a different reason
One option you might consider is keeping radiant as the the disease-zombies' fortitude-suppressing damage type, but giving a different justification. Perhaps the disease makes them extremely sensitive to bright light. Direct sunlight isn't quite powerful enough to do more than give them a quick sunburn, but focused radiant damage definitely hurts. There is definitely precedent for such vulnerability in many zombie stories.
In fact, you might take it even farther and say that direct sunlight also suppresses their fortitude trait, making them easier to kill during the day. Or maybe sunlight even does 1 radiant damage per round, making the zombies effectively nocturnal, with a need to hide in shelter or underground during the day. You can use this to present the players with interesting strategic choices and elevate the tension, such as: should the party attack now, in the middle of the night, or should they try to hold out until morning?
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
Consider sticking with radiant damage, but for a different reason
One option you might consider is keeping radiant as the the disease-zombies' fortitude-suppressing damage type, but giving a different justification. Perhaps the disease makes them extremely sensitive to bright light. Direct sunlight isn't quite powerful enough to do more than give them a quick sunburn, but focused radiant damage definitely hurts. There is definitely precedent for such vulnerability in many zombie stories.
In fact, you might take it even farther and say that direct sunlight also suppresses their fortitude trait, making them easier to kill during the day. Or maybe sunlight even does 1 radiant damage per round, making the zombies effectively nocturnal, with a need to hide in shelter or underground during the day. You can use this to present the players with interesting strategic choices and elevate the tension, such as: should the party attack now, in the middle of the night, or should they try to hold out until morning?
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
answered 1 min ago
Ryan Thompson
2,277535
2,277535
add a comment |Â
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%2fwhat-damage-type-vulnerability-makes-sense-for-disease-based-zombies-rather-than%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
I"m not sure if this is 100% opinion-based or not as I think answers that provide guidance but not specific direction (unless they have tested a mechanic themselves) seem like they should be ok.
– NautArch
2 hours ago
It seems like a fine question for Good Subjective / Bad Subjective.
– Bloodcinder
2 hours ago
As presented this seems subjective/ opinion-based. The reason is that it depends heavily on your setting and what you want to do with it.
– JP Chapleau
41 mins ago