Beholder - "solo monster"

[Stormonu]

In 3e...none that I am aware of. They all lose out in the action economy (being outclassed 5 actions to 1 sucks).

Maybe if you had your beholder hover directly above the party and divided them into 4 quadrants, then it might be a viable solo threat (in that it could actually use all 10 eye rays each turn (as a free action to boot!)

Dragons will do it in 3E. I had a Green dragon named Verdenthorax that defeated a party twice (2 PCs & a charmed ettin tried to take it on first and ran, they came back with the whole party and I proceeded to TPK them with the dragon - unintentionally, but you get what you get when you provoke the damn thing after it retreats to heal). If I remember right, they were about 6th level and the dragon was 4 CRs above them.

 

[Gort]

When were beholders not able to take on a whole party alone?

There's an inherent problem with this statement: You should NEVER run a solo alone.

 

[MrMyth]

There's an inherent problem with this statement: You should NEVER run a solo alone.

Really?

I mean, I understand your point - many solo encounters (especially some of the early ones) can be dramatically enhanced by clever terrain and allies that keep the fight from consisting of the party surrounding an enemy and beating it into the ground.

But the beholder is a flying orb of death that is constantly firing eye-rays on every single player's turn, with powerful effects that can completely shut down PCs (putting them to sleep, restraining them, petrifying or even just killing them), along with several rays that send PCs elsewhere on the battlefield. Which, admittedly, makes interesting terrain even more entertaining in such a fight... but I think the Beholder, as Solo designs go, is very capable of making for both a challenging and engaging fight with no additions required.

 

[Quantarum]

In 3.5 I never ran beholder by itself, they always had charmed slaves (I made the assumption that anything hit with the charm ray enough times would eventually become slavish to it's master). The last time I used one it had a number of charmed trolls and I tweaked it's telekinesis so it could fling them into the parties midst. I kept the beholder at maximum ray distance to flummox the parties beefy melees, but I put too much faith in the antimagic cone and the parties wizard hit it with a critical disintegrate, somewhat anticlimactic but a memorable encounter.
I've yet to try a beholder in 4E, but I think I could use a similar setup.
-Q.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I just went through and watched the D&D4 videos that WotC created back before D&D4 was released.

Something that struck me was the interviewer mentioning to the Beholder, "...they're making you into a solo monster. You'll be able to take on a whole party of adventurers all on your own."

The Beholder gets all emotional at that.

When were beholders not able to take on a whole party alone?

I've never used multiple beholders, but in 3.0, I found just using one to be quite weak, due to poor defenses and, since the PCs would obviously spread out to avoid the anti-magic eye, they could only shut down one spellcaster (and said spellcaster could shoot it with a crossbow). The PCs killed it in one round, and only the rogue died, and only due to bad luck (he took cover and concealment but was still disintegrated).

With their charm abilities, they're intended to have slaves/cannon fodder. I presume the 3.5 version to be up to snuff, but never got around to using one.

I think the 4e version doesn't have charm abilities, so instead they rake their opponents with their deadly eyebeams, and it looks like it would be a fun fight.

 

[Turtlejay]

Oh man, this reminds me of the Beholders in Baldur's Gate. I never got past them. I must have died and reloaded a hundred times.

I ran a beholder in a 4e one shot as part of an aberrant invasion. It was defeated by an illusory wall. It never made it through, and was trapped in a halway and killed. Kind of an letdown for me, but the players enjoyed it.

Jay

 

[NewJeffCT]

I ran a beholder encounter several years back that scared the wits out of the players - it was a high magic game and the beholder had itself perfectly positioned to use its anti-magic ray on the entire party - and it was then (due to the anti-magic) almost inaccessible. Meanwhile, the beholders minions were mere kobolds placed up on treacherous ledges... normally not a threat, but with no magical protections and with rolling 50 d20s per round, I was hitting each PC several times and wearing them down quickly. Finally, the two party fighters managed to engage the troll bodyguards and defeat them and then managed to get to the beholder. But, it was a tough battle where the party was stretched to its limit. But, the beholder was able to maximize the terrain on the battlefield (an underground cavern that was conveniently shaped just like the anti-magic ray of the beholder...)

 

[Raven Crowking]

(an underground cavern that was conveniently shaped just like the anti-magic ray of the beholder...)

Conveniently? Or the result of multiple disintigrations?

Really, a beholder has the means to ensure that the terrain is in its favour, every time, and has the means to make an effective escape route as well (either straight up or straight down, either using antimagic or disintigrate to cover itself as it flees).

In 1e, at least, beholders were lawful evil, which meant that they could (should?) have minions of their own to harass the PCs while they used their rays to the best possible advantage. And beholders are smart, meaning that they can think ahead enough to bottleneck intruders into a killing field. IMHO, the PCs who reach the beholder's lair still ready and willing to fight are both canny and lucky indeed, because the beholder will have done everything in its (considerable) power to make this difficult.

And one can be certain that the beholder's actual lair/treasure storage takes advantage of its natural ability to fly......Players should be leery indeed of sending their characters over an apparently-bottomless chasm, knowing that an antimagic ray might at any time end their flight!


RC

 

[AllisterH]

But isn't using the terrain to your advantage something that even KOBOLDS do and shouldn't be just a beholder thing?

The infamous tucker kobolds are of course the best example.

But really, unless you somehow end up in a gladiatorial pit, the vast majority of encounters with monsters should be in situations where the terrain favours them since the PCs tend to be attackers/interlopers

Only if you're running a "defend the village" scenario, can I see the terrain not favouring the monsters. Hell, even the classic "ambush the caravan the pcs are hired to guard" scenario should take place in a situation where the ambushers use the terrain to their advantage (for example, the caravan has to go through a narrow valley with lots of spots for archers to take cover behind)

So I'm not sure using "intelligent use of terrain and lackeys" makes a beholder a solo monster.

 

[Stoat]

The big problem with the Beholder is that its best defense (the anti-magic eye) nullifies its best offense (all those other eyes).

A simple bottleneck isn't going to work well for Mr. B. Either it shuts down the party's magic and tries to gum them to death or it takes what they can throw at it while shooting them eye rays. Its best strategy is probably to keep spellcasters in the anti-magic cone while pummeling non-casters with eye rays.

What it needs is a way to scatter and separate the PC's.