Mearls Monster Makeover: Beholder

[Glyfair]

Beholders must kick ass once again.

I'm sorry, beholders NEVER did that. They have always lacked the necessary appendage for that (barring some really odd variation that appeared once in an appendix of a poorly circulated supplement, and they probably didn't kick either).

 

[Fishbone]

You know what I mean. It used to be a real tough fight to get your XP and money from them. Now creatures of a "cooler" breed get lower CR and stronger abilities just because.
Mid level demons, angels, and dragons eat Beholders for breakfast and pick their teeth with Mind Flayer tentacles and its just not right.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Kunimatyu, the point of reworking the Antimagic Eye was to get rid of the 15 minutes of recalculation required by suppressing magic. You just put that back in...

I solve this by getting rid of about 90% of the buff spells. The beholder (and antimagic in general) is not the problem. The buffs are.

 

[grodog]

An interesting and worthwhile point, JRRN. Tell us more!

 

[happyelf]

Generally I think buffs are the problem, not dispel rays. To see this in action, compare these two statements:

"AIEEE, my mighty magics cannot aid us against this abomination!"

"BOOYAH, my obsessive interlacing of enchantments have made us invincible!"

Wich of these lines are cooler? I'd vote number one.

Personally, i'd change the central eye to inflict the effects of the three power words (blind, stun, kill) all at once, with harsh save numbers and no SR allowed. This would allow for a suitably awesome effect, and has the added bonus of making beholder civl wars freakin' hilarious.

 

[Thurbane]

Generally I think buffs are the problem, not dispel rays. To see this in action, compare these two statements:

"AIEEE, my mighty magics cannot aid us against this abomination!"

"BOOYAH, my obsessive interlacing of enchantments have made us invincible!"

Wich of these lines are cooler? I'd vote number one.

In the words of Hudson "Yo-frickin-ay man!".

I can't believe anyone would want to nerf the major ability of a D&D icon like the Beholder just because it would be "too hard" to recalculate combat abilties without all the buffs up...

Just out of curiosity, does that mean people think Antimagic Field should be dropped from the game as well?

 

[CRGreathouse]

I like the various thoughts on save-or-die spells, especially flesh to stone. I use a similar mechanic for basilisks in my campaign: they deal Dex damage, halved with a Fort save, and losing all your Dex turns you to stone.

 

[glass]

Just out of curiosity, does that mean people think Antimagic Field should be dropped from the game as well?

Some of the designers do, I think. It has been mentioned in the design columns before.


glass.

 

[Glyfair]

Some of the designers do, I think. It has been mentioned in the design columns before.

Indeed. There tend to be two types of spells that are questioned by the WotC designers and developers, it seems. The first is the "not fun" things, that are rarely fun except in certain limited situations. The second is the "not worth the complications they cause" things. Antimagic Field comes under the second qualifier.

I think you can find a major list of the things that go under the second category by going over the Dragon's Sage Advice column over the years and see which things regularly have questions about them.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I like the various thoughts on save-or-die spells, especially flesh to stone. I use a similar mechanic for basilisks in my campaign: they deal Dex damage, halved with a Fort save, and losing all your Dex turns you to stone.

How much Dex damage? Is there a "racial bonus" to the save DC?