Talk:Garchomp (3.5e Monster)

Ratings
About Draco Meteor - that can explicitly be used only once per hour. And Garchomp's quickness doesn't recharge it any faster. I actually prefer Dragonite, so fan wank has nothing to do with this. (The real fan wank from me can be found in Mew's article, 'cause that's my favorite Pokémon by far.) And the brokenness? Garchomp got banned from standard competitive play on Smogon, because any team not explicitly built to deal with it got shredded. I was trying to recreate the same sense of dread here - that when Garchomp shows up, the players will be going "Oh, @#*%." (I explicitly said that Garchomp was unfair.) I did tone it down a little, though. --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Fine, I guess I didn't read that little clause but it does little to change my point. An effective three or four turns per round is too much. There's so many less broken and utterly exploitable ways to accomplish this, like giving it alacrity and access to things like a reflavoured temporal acceleration, access to more ways to utilize instantaneous actions, and altogether improving its base damage. Even at three turns per round, damage from effects like Power Attack stacks out of proportion real quick. That said, it sure hits like a pansy. On a semi-related note, a primary bite attack adds one and a half times its Strength bonus to damage.


 * As an end note, just stating in the article that Garchomp is 'unfair' is no excuse for its flouting of general game balance. It's up to the creator to make it fair. For now, my rating stands. --Sulacu (talk) 14:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't really know what you mean by any of that. Is "aclarity" meant to be moment of aclarity? What's an instantaneous action? And I really want Garchomp to get an absurd number of attacks per round - the whole point is to make monks very, very jealous. Garchomp is what the monk should be - making up for a relative lack of power with immense speed. --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, Garchomp's meant to be able to go toe-to-toe with a typical adventuring party, which will outnumber it four to one. Getting nearly as many actions as they do goes a long way towards that; in fact, I think that a lot of monsters in 4th edition do exactly that... --Luigifan18 (talk) 16:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually, by the rules, a monster of CR X is supposed to be able to go toe-to-toe with an X-level adventurer and win 50% of the time. --Ghostwheel (talk) 16:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)