Beholder's Eye Beams

[Infiniti2000]

I now look forward to a message from the mods telling me to stop posting on a thread I've already said I'm going to stop posting on.

I have not reported any posts, so don't look to me if that happens.

There's not much in the way of turning rules in the game...

Except for the rules on turning, of course.

Regardless, I see no new arguments coming out here. KD, if you feel unsatisfied with just letting it go, let me know if you want me to explain anything again. The spinning disco beholder of doom is not as strong as you think, based on my experience with them (though I may make one named Tony Manero now), though obviously it makes them stronger than otherwise. Without the spinning disco effect, then they are undeniably chumps. One side effect of not having the spinning disco ball, however, is that the 3 rays pointed at the party will always be the 3 'save or die' effects Caliban mentioned (except that it's finger of death, not slay living).

 

[Rel]

Yet you did indeeed respond and "take the bait", which makes your entire post somewhat hypocritical. Apparently "la la la I'm not talking to you" is the best you could come up with.

As you wish.

Let's all remember what a glorious day it was when we realized that when Caliban said, "As you wish." what he really meant was, "I love you." Speaking of which, I think this thread could use a little more love and a lot less snark.

 

[shilsen]

Let's all remember what a glorious day it was when we realized that when Caliban said, "As you wish." what he really meant was, "I love you."

Rel wins the thread!

 

[ChefOrc]

I guess it it threads like this that made Mike Mearls decide to run a "let's revisit the beholder" seminar at GenCon ...

Anyways, I was reading the Complete Guide to Beholders from Goodman Games. Their take on it solves the problem completely (I am not saying they are necessarily right, but their solution is effective).

There is a sentence in the description of beholders that says:

Each of the beholder's small eyes can produce a magical ray once per round as a free action

Now this sentence can be normally understood as saying that every eye ray shoots once a round, or if you stretch it a bit, that it is the action of shooting that can be taken once a round. In other words, all eye rays have to be shot at the same time, once per round. Now that assumes that the author of the beholder entry was not very clear, but that really wouldn't be the first time ...

With that assumption, the "apparent intent" of being restricted to 3 eye ray per arc is automatically respected. A beholder can turn and move as much as it wants before or after firing its rays. All that matters is that when it shoots (once per round), the arcs are specified, and the limit per arc is applied.

Simple and effective. I personnally like that interpratation because I feel that this is what the intent was.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Bah! Here we go again. Those @#$% 3e designers are fraggin' up a perfectly good monster by completely destroying the wondrous flavor of the 1e original by allowing more than 3 beams at one PC. Can't they leave well enough alone!!!

I am going to throw all my D&D books on a bonfire, rend my clothes, gnash my teeth, and wail to the heavens in protest.

 

[Gansk]

In other words, all eye rays have to be shot at the same time, once per round.

Simple and effective. I personnally like that interpratation because I feel that this is what the intent was.

That's not a bad compromise, but I would still pre-assign the eyes to the arcs before running the encounter. Otherwise the three so-called "save or die" eyes will still be used almost exclusively.

 

[Benimoto]

That's not a bad compromise, but I would still pre-assign the eyes to the arcs before running the encounter. Otherwise the three so-called "save or die" eyes will still be used almost exclusively.

It seems to me that it's basically a given that the Beholder will be using the three most effective rays possible for a single target. Pre-assigning the eyes, to me, ignores the sentence "The beholder can tilt and pan its body each round to change which rays it can bring to bear in any given arc."

 

[ChefOrc]

I agree with Benimoto. Considering it is a CR13 monster, it is fair to let the beholder use any 3 rays on a single target (but IMHO, 10 would be too much and almost guarantee a kill).

The nice thing about it is that the DM does not have to tell the players which eye ray is where ahead of time, so he can use 3 very deadly rays on the same target if it feels like it, or just be nice to the players by dividing the deadly rays if that makes the game more fun.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Bah! Here we go again. Those @#$% 3e designers are fraggin' up a perfectly good monster by completely destroying the wondrous flavor of the 1e original by allowing more than 3 beams at one PC. Can't they leave well enough alone!!!

Ridley destroyed the wondrous flavour of the 1E original all by himself, when he chucked a rock to distract them...

-Hyp.