Recent content by angelroble

Except for Mental Debilitation, the conditions are not cumulative for a given ray attack, but sucessive: you have one condition, or the next one, etc. In any case, the GM should not track the conditions that affect a PC, but the player. At least, that's what I do.

I have done some modifications on my first version. I have adopted the Wind Stance Feat (great idea), increased Con and Dex, added a cumulative penalty for mental ray and non lethal damage on the paralysis ray. I also corrected some (minor) errors and edited some of the text to be (hopefully)...

What about non-lethal damage (which causes also the staggered and unconscious conditions)? This damage is easily healed, but if you don't pay attention, you could be in trouble. About 5d6 (18hp) no save would be ok.

I'm finally convinced the DCs must be higher. What about this option? If one PC is hit by one ray in a given round and he pass the save check, there is a -2 penalty (cumulative) for that ray save in the next round, until he fails his save. Perhaps only for save-or-suck rays (not for the pain...

Just one thing, James: the antimagic ray is no longer an antimagic area effect. It only supress one given spell, or illusions in the area, or counterspells as an immediate action. On the playtest: yes, I plan to do a playtest before Sunday, as my group perhaps find the B. that session. Sadly...

Yes, that was my thought. All the save-or-die/suck were removed to allow PCs to "fight" against them over several rounds. They are removed from fight for some rounds, returnig perhaps in the moment another PC is knocked down for another few rounds...

A 10th level cleric has a base fort save of +7, at 13th level it's +8. Add maybe +2 for Con (Clerics need lots of different stats), and +2 or so for resistance. That means they need 5 or so in the dice roll... So maybe the DC it's too low for the lowest save a cleric has to roll. Of course...

I had a look at that version before my own conversion. I liked some of the options, mainly the reduction of types of rays and the antimagic ray mechanics; also the way to avoid facing rules. I have, in some way, taken those mechanics in my B. Some other options are not of my taste. Ex: 2...

1) Armored clerics can be taken down with pain rays / paralysis rays. 2) Ranged fighters/arcane archers/paladins are truly the main threat for beholders. I will think about it. 3) A barbarian can be feared/confused and avoided with flight. Hey, who is not an snack after dancing two rounds with...

Hi James, I'm so happy you have posted in here! I was going to bring this issue to the Paizo forums, but I saw some threads where you (or someone else from your staff) were not comfortable with conversions because of the OGC thing and the relationship with WOTC... About the B: I did look at...

I'm not sure about this. My 1st ed. manual lists Large size for the B, though it is supposed to be 4-6' diameter (while it's about 8' in 3.5). I will think about this. You are right that size hampers the B.

...So I am running this Shadowdale campaign as a DM and one of the monsters the PCs face is a Beholder. There's no beholder in PF, as it's not OGC, and though I could use it as it's in the 3.5 MM, I've decided to do my own conversion. Some of the features of the old beholder are not of my taste...