D&D 5E Beholder hunting: nasty counter-tactics to Darkness?

[iserith]

So far the only ones I've got involve:

1.) digging pits and trenches with Disintegration to create barriers,
2.) collapsing tunnels behind the giff to suffocate them in earth,
3.) digging a tunnel straight up and then levitating up there so you can get behind the giff with Darkness, without him noticing you, and
4.) pincer-counterattack such that Darkness can only protect part of the giff column. Then hit the wizard, if possible, to decapitate the enemy force.

If the beholders can't come up with better tactics that that I give them no better than a 50% chance of survival.

As was already mentioned, the anti-magic central eye does for that darkness spell.

Here's another idea: Some of the beholders withdraw to a section of the ship that is basically mirrored on the floors, ceiling, and walls. Perhaps it's some aspect of the spelljammer helm, propulsion system, or even a "sensor" system used for scrying. As a result of the crash, many of the mirrors are cracked. When a beholder fires an eye ray and it misses the target (because the target made its save), the eye ray hits a mirror and bounces off, targeting a random creature other than the initial target within 30 feet which must also make a save. So even if the darkness spell is not suppressed, the beholders can essentially "skip" an eye ray into the darkness by banking it off a mirror and still have a chance of hitting a target. Smart players might start smashing mirrors, but of course this is bad luck - such characters take disadvantage on the next d20 roll they make.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Wow. I didn't notice this until Hemlock pointed it out. 5E turned Beholders into a joke creature easily defeated by simplistic tactics. How does a game designer not understand how much weaker a Beholder becomes when eye rays are random and can only hit targets they can see? No wonder Hemlock by RAW is allowing a party to fight them. They are a vastly higher CR than they should be in 5E for a creature easily defeated by not being able to see the target with no ability to see invisible or unseen creatures. That is perhaps the biggest ball I've seen dropped in monster design in 5E.

Actually, I hadn't yet noticed this weakness when I gave the PCs a shipfull of beholders to fight. Twenty-four gimmicky monsters at once is a bit too much free XP--if I'd noticed this then I would have added some hobgoblin foot soldiers or something to make anti-magic a more interesting tactic. The PCs are gone now but the NPC wizard and his giff NPC platoon are still there, as described in the OP, so the question is "what happens to the giffs?"

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Actually, I hadn't yet noticed this weakness when I gave the PCs a shipfull of beholders to fight. Twenty-four gimmicky monsters at once is a bit too much free XP--if I'd noticed this then I would have added some hobgoblin foot soldiers or something to make anti-magic a more interesting tactic. The PCs are gone now but the NPC wizard and his giff NPC platoon are still there, as described in the OP, so the question is "what happens to the giffs?"

Just because you through of this tactic does not mean the giff did. Also if there are 24 Beholders they can just rush the Giff if needed and win.

Anyway if needed I would say that a Beholder can guess were a target is to laser them. If in Magical darkness give the Giff advantage on the saving throw. I see any sane DM allowing it.

Oh Yeah the Beholders don't need Light in their ships. So the Ship would be purely dark inside anyway so the giff would not be able to see that well anyway.

 

[KarinsDad]

As was already mentioned, the anti-magic central eye does for that darkness spell.

Here's another idea: Some of the beholders withdraw to a section of the ship that is basically mirrored on the floors, ceiling, and walls. Perhaps it's some aspect of the spelljammer helm, propulsion system, or even a "sensor" system used for scrying. As a result of the crash, many of the mirrors are cracked. When a beholder fires an eye ray and it misses the target (because the target made its save), the eye ray hits a mirror and bounces off, targeting a random creature other than the initial target within 30 feet which must also make a save. So even if the darkness spell is not suppressed, the beholders can essentially "skip" an eye ray into the darkness by banking it off a mirror and still have a chance of hitting a target. Smart players might start smashing mirrors, but of course this is bad luck - such characters take disadvantage on the next d20 roll they make.

I doubt that super intelligent Beholders would have mirrors that allowed them to disintegrate themselves by accident.

 

[KarinsDad]

Human archers shoot using hit rolls. Beholder eye rays require saving throws assuming they auto-hit creatures they can see. You could give perhaps give advantage on saving throws given the Beholder can't see the target. It would have been much more intelligent design to require the Beholder to make attack rolls. By RAW it does say "must see" target. So any DM, experienced or inexperienced, is going to have to deal with this tactic for beholders. It should have been taken care of in the creature's design. There's no excuse for overlooking something as common as invisibility or darkness causing this type of problem.

And the random rays further weakens them. A beholder not being able to operate tactically weakens them by at least a few CR.

I would not even mess with this level of rulings.

I would make two simple rules:

1) Beholder spells works like every other caster's spells. Darkness or Invisibility does not defeat their spells.
2) Beholder eyes are not random.

Why in the world would a DM allow himself to be handicapped by such stupid monster design decisions by a faceless game designer? Take control of your game and get rid of the nonsense rules (like Concentration limited to a single spell, or Attunement which has zero need in a game where the DM controls the magic item acquisition).

I find it odd that so many DMs want to play the game "exactly as written".

Take control of your game and make it "your game".

Ignore nonsensical rules.

 

[iserith]

I doubt that super intelligent Beholders would have mirrors that allowed them to disintegrate themselves by accident.

The mirrors make for a potentially fun scene that tells an exciting, memorable story regardless of whatever subjective standard you assign to their intelligence score.

In any case, as long as they aren't within 30 feet of the target, they have nothing to worry about. Smart players can even use this to their advantage, forcing the beholder to make a choice between possibly targeting itself or repositioning.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

If the giffs are in darkness, how do they see the beholders so as to be able to grapple them?

 

[KarinsDad]

The mirrors make for a potentially fun scene that tells an exciting, memorable story regardless of whatever subjective standard you assign to their intelligence score.

I didn't know that high intelligent creatures should be subjectively played stupidly.

This is like a trap discussion. Most monsters, even dumb ones, would never have traps in their lair where they themselves might potentially set them off. They might have them, but not where there's a fair chance of them screwing up and smacking themselves with them. You don't leave sharp kitchen knives on your floors at night, just in case burglars break into your house at night.

Playing intelligent monsters stupidly, just in order to add a cool new wrinkle to your encounter doesn't make the encounter cooler, it makes it implausible.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

If the giffs are in darkness, how do they see the beholders so as to be able to grapple them?

You mean, how do they know a beholder is hiding there in the darkness, waiting for them to come out? The giff has to hope it rolls high on its attempt to hear the beholder (Search: active Perception, disadvantage due to Darkness) or that the beholder rolls poorly on Stealth. If not, the beholder has now gotten past your front line Darkness and can try to target the wizard/leader.

As far as tactical concerns go, once combat starts, Darkness impairs grappling not at all. Which makes perfect sense.

 

[iserith]

I didn't know that high intelligent creatures should be subjectively played stupidly.

This is like a trap discussion. Most monsters, even dumb ones, would never have traps in their lair where they themselves might potentially set them off. They might have them, but not where there's a fair chance of them screwing up and smacking themselves with them. You don't leave sharp kitchen knives on your floors at night, just in case burglars break into your house at night.

Playing intelligent monsters stupidly, just in order to add a cool new wrinkle to your encounter doesn't make the encounter cooler, it makes it implausible.

I recognize a trait in you that I see in many gamers which I consider unfortunate. Instead of "might" or "could," you appear to think of things in terms of "would" or "should." You also appear to think of why things can't be instead of why they can. To me, this is not very compatible with a game based on imagination.

So here, you choose to think the beholders "would" never find themselves in a situation where they could accidentally disintegrate themselves. They "can't" do this because they're just too smart.

Me, I think they "could" because it's a neat set piece and I imagine that given the giffs' tactics with darkness, the beholders "might" try to get into a situation that puts them at some risk (again, only if they fire a ray at a target within 30 feet which they don't have to do), but also gives them an advantage. They "can" do this because their inscrutable alien minds sometimes lead them to make decisions like this.

That's our fundamental difference.