Beholders: See a problem?

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Thu May 16, 2013 4:17 pm

I plan on throwing some beholders at my party, and wanted to see if anyone had any issues or advice with them.

For general use, I'd imagine they're going to want a contingent of giants to throw rocks and beat people up that get too close, since they stink in melee and can't attack whatever they're locking down with their AMF. They'll otherwise prefer to be flanked so they can get maximum use of their powers.

And of course, any problems with using them in general should be something to be aware of. I imagine before the adventure starts using them I'm going to want to have the players cook up a statblock sans magic.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Thu May 16, 2013 6:19 pm

What LEVEL is your party and how OPTIMIZED they are?

Beholders can be pretty deadly, depending on luck and tactics.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Thu May 16, 2013 6:25 pm

Level 11 is their level, and I was wanting beholders to be the thematic bad guy of the adventure; sort of like how Act 2 in Rise of the Runelords is about giants.

Optimization level is, in effect, probably on the Tome rogue level.

CCarter · Post by **CCarter** » Thu May 16, 2013 11:59 pm

Most of this is probably obvious, but beholders being a save-or-die monster, expect possible casualties, and battles are going to be fairly swingy.

There's a bit of fun stuff in Lords of Madness. In particular it specifies what item slots beholders get and there's a Metaray feat that lets them metamagic up eye rays (takes a standard action, burns out the eyestalk for rounds equal to the level adjustment).

The traditional beholder lair thing is the 3-D tunnel network which the beholders levitate up and down; you can have shafts where one stays at the top of a shaft and beam antimagic down, while a friend rolls boulders down onto anyone trying to climb up. If you can move the PCs onto a prepared battlefield, one can potentially pull levers and things to set off traps or portcullis type thingies with a Telekinesis ray.

Undead minions are particularly handy for beholders if they can get them, since they have Inflict at will (assuming party damage is low enough vs. undead, or it has enough other defenses reducing damage to make the amount of healing worthwhile). Potentially you could also make a self-healing beholder with Tomb-Tainted Soul from Libris Mortis (or an undead beholder, obviously).

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri May 17, 2013 12:17 am

One of the few cool things to come out of D20 Modern was an organization of hobos cared for by beholders. Basically, beholders rounded up homeless people, gave them a place to live, and started using them to eavesdrop on more powerful people in the cities. There were a few sample magic things the hobos could have, a tattoo that acted as a third eye, pendants which mimicked beholder rays, and contact lenses made in batches of ten pairs, which allowed wearers to see through each others' eyes. Could be good for some inspiration. It's in Urban Arcana, though there isn't really much more to it.

Schleiermacher · Post by **Schleiermacher** » Fri May 17, 2013 12:18 am

Only problem with running beholders is adjudicating timing and positioning for the placement of their antimagic cone, since D&D doesn't have much in the way of facing rules.

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Fri May 17, 2013 6:45 pm

You may want to look at Beholderkin as well.

Warm up the players with the lower end stuff like Gauths, Eyes of the Deep, etc.

In my own heartbreaker research into trying to create "super groups" of creatures, I found that Beholders seem to be related with an awful lot of other D&D monsters that aren't described as Beholderkin in any D&D source that I've ever heard of.

Mostly the 8-limbed, single eyed, creatures that occur in the monster manual; like Ropers, Delvers; and seemingly Behirs (a stretch since they're not depicted with a single eye, but they do have 8 limbs).

As well as Mini Handbook's Nothic (single eye with a flesh-rotting gaze) and Mad Slasher (single eye, depicted with 6 limbs, but adding 2 won't really change anything about it imho).

photos from my the sketchbook (posted August 7, 2011; of slightly older drawings) that had these notes:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 6455_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 6349_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 4671_n.jpg

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Fri May 17, 2013 7:23 pm

I never even considered seeing a Beholderlephant or a Beholdermato.

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Fri May 17, 2013 7:57 pm

Yep, those are in there.

The elephant was a result of previous readings I had done on the origin of the term "Cyclopean" within architechture; and the origin of the concept of cyclopean creatures within Greek mythology stemming from elephant skulls (whose central skull cavity that the trunk emerges from could be inferred as a massive eye socket).

The Beholdermato came about after the Beholderpotato; which has 'eyes', and got me thinking about plant creatures in general.

I'm surprised you didn't consider Beholdelephant Mt. Rushmore to be more unlikely.

Also, forgot to mention Spikers, and Darkmantles in the earlier post.

At some point I was considering that Beholders are merely organic servitors of a mineral based species that vaguely resembled tusked elephants; what with the large amount of creatures that look like cavern geography, the fact that Beholders are natural cave burrowers (Disintegrate eye), that Beholders without leadership are always rogue, while with leadership are always controlled by a singular 'parent'.

At this point; I'm trying to focus on sorting D&D monsters, and Frank's Fantasy Kitchensink list, into the 38~ categories of creatures that After Sundown uses.

"Chimera" and "Revenant" have an awful lot of content within them I've found. Mostly b/c a lot of D&D monsters are "bullshit stuff stuck together", and "lots of undead are sentient".

Oozes and some others are more trouble, however putting them under "Evil Plants" does seem like the better option, over placing yet more stuff within the rather wide purview of "Chimera".

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Fri May 17, 2013 8:06 pm

Judging__Eagle wrote:https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 6455_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 6349_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 4671_n.jpg

I'd buy a T-shirt with the beholderphant. (stovetop hat optional but highly desirable).

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Fri May 17, 2013 8:16 pm

That's Abraham Lincoln, the Beholderphant emancipator of [unknown*], to be precise; and thanks.

*: I was thinking about famous carved stone heads from around the world in history at the time. I don't actually have an alternate Earth setting figured out where they belong in a way that satisfies me.

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Fri May 17, 2013 9:12 pm

Judging__Eagle wrote:That's Abraham Lincoln, the Beholderphant emancipator of [unknown*], to be precise; and thanks.

*: I was thinking about famous carved stone heads from around the world in history at the time. I don't actually have an alternate Earth setting figured out where they belong in a way that satisfies me.

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Fri May 17, 2013 10:44 pm

Oh, I know about that one.

I thought you were talking about the one with a stovetop hat in the same image.

nockermensch · Post by **nockermensch** » Fri May 17, 2013 11:39 pm

Judging__Eagle wrote:Oh, I know about that one.

I thought you were talking about the one with a stovetop hat in the same image.

Both are pretty boss, but the one above has colors and was easier to separate, so it won my heart.

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Sat May 18, 2013 4:03 am

Fair enough, I'm glad you liked it.

I've always had problems with using colour in my drawings, but a few years ago I picked up a set of "ink pencils" by Inkwert, and I've introduced them into my work a lot more.

Mostly because they lay down colour incredibly smooth, and don't give me the "toothiness" that harder coloured pencils tend to have.

When they're dipped in water they act lay down something a lot more like ink; and if I go over a dry drawing with a wet paintbrush I've been able to get very interesting pseudo-watercolour like effects.

They're also able to mark pretty much any surface when wet, and I've used them for facepaint that actually goes onto skin; which isn't a big pain to wash off.

Also, if you're interested in a better scan/photo of the drawing, or a more developed version of the creature; for your own limited use I'd be willing to negotiate something.

While I have a couple of sketchbooks of content photo'd and posted on 'friends only' albums on FB, I've been keeping most of my drawings offline, or in limited access, because of concerns for IP that I've been made aware of in reading many webcomics; and seeing many artists work reposted on other sites without attribution.

However, I've got an animation pitch bootcamp starting on Tuesday, and I'm finally feeling more comfortable about taking on art commissions. Which means that I need to have more/most of my current work, and as much as I can of my older work visibly online.

To that end, I've been researching how to 'safely' post images of self-created work from a variety of sources (eBay has an interesting advice page) working on a logo based around my name, the Fibonacci Spiral and the square sequence that accompanies it. Which I plan on placing on the images of my drawings.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Sat May 18, 2013 3:32 pm

The easiest way for me to find an artist is for them to watermark or corner the address of the website where most of their stuff is at, where they take commissions or whatever, onto everything they post, sketches and all. If it's not obscuring the action the "sharers" will leave it be, IME.

I can also use the reverse image search on google, but that's more like work, and often takes some annoying side-trips to track things down. tineye better for finding any changed versions if people have cropped or shopped things.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 3:41 am

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20061028a

This was written by Mearls, so it's obviously full of fail. The fact he talks about keeping charm person because of its out-of-combat utility and iconic nature, yet removes the other charm and flesh to stone is frustrating.

I'm looking into the various beholderkin and contemplating revisiting them as an empire as they were used in Spelljammer. One of the major things to consider is their central eye and its use for the subspecies.

spongeknight · Post by **spongeknight** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 4:19 am

virgil wrote:http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20061028a

This was written by Mearls, so it's obviously full of fail. The fact he talks about keeping charm person because of its out-of-combat utility and iconic nature, yet removes the other charm and flesh to stone is frustrating.

I'm looking into the various beholderkin and contemplating revisiting them as an empire as they were used in Spelljammer. One of the major things to consider is their central eye and its use for the subspecies.

It almost physically pains me to say this, but that article actually does raise some good points. Multiple save-or-die effects every turn- especially if the party fights more than one beholder at a time- almost guarantees that your players will stop having fun and will likely die. As a player I would be super pissed if on round one I had to make a fort save vs finger of death, fort save vs flesh to stone, fort save vs finger of death, fort save vs flesh to stone- oh look, I failed one! Time to roll a new character.

I would highly suggest reworking beholders so that they're still scary and thematic but less... unfun. I mean, a giant eyeball shooting lasers at you can definitely be an exciting fight, but getting punked because one of your saves wasn't high enough is just about the worst thing the 3.5 system has produced.

erik · Post by **erik** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:07 am

spongeknight wrote:It almost physically pains me to say this, but that article actually does raise some good points. Multiple save-or-die effects every turn- especially if the party fights more than one beholder at a time- almost guarantees that your players will stop having fun and will likely die. As a player I would be super pissed if on round one I had to make a fort save vs finger of death, fort save vs flesh to stone, fort save vs finger of death, fort save vs flesh to stone- oh look, I failed one! Time to roll a new character.

Put the pain meds back, Mearls doesn't raise any good points. The party is level 11. Death does not necessarily equate new character. If you are unwilling to face an opponent with Save or Die abilities then you are pretty heavily culling the herd of potential enemies. Facing two beholders at once should be pretty deadly for them because a single one alone is rated at being likely to kill a party member.

Now, it is also poor planning to go into a battle with a known death ray wielder without applying your anti-deathray wards or other obvious deterrents.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:18 am

I had my players stumble across some of those floating, exploding gas spores that look like beholders in the Crypts of Chaos. They managed to detonate them all at once. Good times, good times.

With any of the bigger and deadlier monsters in D&D the key is always preparation. If you run into the dragon's lair blind, you deserve to fall into a pit trap/latrine that the dragon flies over. With beholders, if you know that you're going to encounter a beholder you plan ahead, if it's a random encounter then you improvise - which can and should include running away.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:29 am

erik wrote:Put the pain meds back, Mearls doesn't raise any good points. The party is level 11. Death does not necessarily equate new character.

No, Mr. Mearls is right -- save or die (as opposed to "save or debuff") effects are boring. They either do nothing (which is boring) or they bring someone's play experience to an abrupt halt (which is boring).

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:25 pm

hogarth wrote:
erik wrote:Put the pain meds back, Mearls doesn't raise any good points. The party is level 11. Death does not necessarily equate new character.
No, Mr. Mearls is right -- save or die (as opposed to "save or debuff") effects are boring. They either do nothing (which is boring) or they bring someone's play experience to an abrupt halt (which is boring).

Yeah, even with raise dead, it basically instantly means your party turns back to rest so you can revive the downed guy. Probably it means that you end up going back to town to seek out a true resurrection, so there's no death penalties. In any case, it brings the adventure to a halt while you try to fix the dead guy.

Ghoul paralysis is a good model for save abilities. You get hit, you're out of the combat unless you have the proper counter ability to fix it.

I'd like to see instant death effects and raise dead effects removed from the game entirely. It's way more interesting to know that someone has to run over and stabilize the guy who got hit by wail of the banshee.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 3:07 pm

The Final Fantasy route could be used on death effects. Make potions of resurrection available, so that for a prepared party death means two members of the party are out for a turn. It sort of turns death effects into a weak multitarget stun effect.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 3:18 pm

Prak_Anima wrote:The Final Fantasy route could be used on death effects. Make potions of resurrection available, so that for a prepared party death means two members of the party are out for a turn. It sort of turns death effects into a weak multitarget stun effect.

I've never been a fan of the logic: "There's nothing wrong with annoying ability X, because you can just make specific counter-ability Y mandatory."

Personally, I think it's pretty lame that Death Ward/Heroes' Feast/Freedom of Movement/etc. are semi-mandatory at high levels in D&D.

Parthenon · Post by **Parthenon** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 3:46 pm

I always wonder how Death Ward is expected to be mandatory. It's only 1 minute per level to a single character- how are you supposed to have Death Ward up for the whole party throughout a dungeon?