I really like the changes made in Mike Mearl's Monster Makeover on the WOTC website to the beholder about a year ago. I think it is a little fairer on the PCs, and decided to use it IMC. Here is the link:
One of the things that changes is that the beholder does not have as many different rays and is easier to run. If someone else wanted to do the same, here are the changes I made to the Oblivion Doors to account for the different abilities. (The Blast Ray is any energy type the beholder wants so thats why it is on there 5 times.)
3A: Cold from Blast Ray
3B: Fear
3C: Disintegrate
3D: Fire from Blast Ray
3E: Lightning from Blast Ray
3F: Sonic from Blast Ray
3G: Charm Person
3H: Slow
3I: Acid from Blast Ray
3J: Telekinesis
I made one of the Fire ones be a door near the haraknin, assuming that Vhalantru would want them to have some ability to move about his sanctuary.
One other note, is that you may want to ignore the DC changes Mearls makes since Vhalantru's better-than-average-beholder Charisma increases the DCs by 5 anyways.
I did a beholder makeover myself back then after reading his (mostly amid some criticisms that it removed certain iconic abilities), and I imagine you've no need for it, but I also wanted something more fair for the players so no reason not to link it since I think it's what I'll be using.
Also, whilst looking at alternate beholder versions, this one is an interesting one to ponder as well:
Keith, I really like yours. I may stick with Mearls', just because I think things have been too difficult. But you hit a nice compromise between the old and the new.
I don't think much of SKR's beholder. That looks like a huge pain in the neck to prepare. In fact, I think his monster levels idea might be the least practical monster design approach ever, at least for use in a core book. (Obviously, this isn't a reflection on KnightErrant :) )
Eh, not a problem, just figured I'd throw it out there.
Keith, I really like yours. I may stick with Mearls', just because I think things have been too difficult. But you hit a nice compromise between the old and the new.
I don't think much of SKR's beholder. That looks like a huge pain in the neck to prepare. In fact, I think his monster levels idea might be the least practical monster design approach ever, at least for use in a core book. (Obviously, this isn't a reflection on KnightErrant :) )
They are monster progression in the Savage Species sense. That is, it is if someone wants to play a beholder. Dont use that as a monster a DM runs as the end result of the monster progression is the MM version of the monster.
So, I finally ran the end of Lords of Oblivion with Mike Mearls' beholder.
Pros:
* There was really only 1 save or die ability and it gets used twice a round. I think my players appreciated the fact that death was more likely from attrition then from a single die roll
* Positioning became extra important since the beholder can telekinesis people away 3 times a round (particularly fighters).
* The alternate charm person ability was really cool because though it kept the rogue out of the fight, it wasn't permanent like petrification.
* It was easier to run because I didn't have to worry about facing and the rays were all pretty easy to use and apply.
Cons:
* Turns out the Caster level check for the antimagic cone wasn't really that difficult. I think there was only one failed spell because of it.
* There were two people near death because of failed disintegration spells. But, really those were quickly healed by the cleric. There wasn't another ability with enough oomph.
* Since the PCs can easily access fly at this point, and the beholder didn't have the antimagic cone (as per spell), it was easy for the PCs to get next to him.
All in all, I thought the fight was challenging, but less than 3 CRs above them. It may be that the template abilities don't really add that much additional difficulty with this particular use of the beholder.
Finally, you may need to come up with some other reason for why all those petrified statues were there since that ability is now gone :)
I'm vacillating on which beholder template to use. My PCs are currently descending into Oblivion (so they've already seen the statues, but they probably wouldn't notice the inconsistency if I used a petrification-free template). They haven't had a genuinely tough fight since Vittris Bale, so I want it to be challenging but not overwhelming.
Questions about using the Mearl template:
1) Did you still include the demodand template? Did those extra powers complement the new template, or did they not get any action?
2) Did you keep the "bonus initiative"/energy surge ability? It seems wrong, somehow, to give any creature two turns per round, even if one of them is just a random blast of power.
3) Did you reduce V's eye stalks by one, to account for the eye graft to Thifirane? If so, how did you deal with T's eye ray (ie. did she just have one ray ability, or could she cycle through them like the revised beholder can)?
Thanks!
1) Did you still include the demodand template? Did those extra powers complement the new template, or did they not get any action?
Yes, I did include the demodand template. The extra powers weren't really useful in my opinion though I fully admit that I may not have been using them optimally. The spit was kinda neat but small and nobody failed the save. Really, the template didn't add much that was useful in a surprise attack combat. As a result, I believe that the Mearls beholder with this template results in a higher CR then is warranted for the challenge presented.
(As I said in the original post, I did tone down the save DCs which would have made a big difference. I think it would have been 27 if I included the +4 from Mearls and the +5 from Vhalantru's ability score. The 23 I did use was probably too low since I only had two failed saves on the disintegrate and both PCs had enough hp. However, 27 seems awfully high for PCs with a poor Fort save. A wizard at best would have a +10 which means they would need a 17 or better to pass. Seems a little tough...)
2) Did you keep the "bonus initiative"/energy surge ability? It seems wrong, somehow, to give any creature two turns per round, even if one of them is just a random blast of power.
Definitely kept it and it was actually pretty cool. Since the two abilities he can use on that extra turn aren't devastating, it adds some novelty without really penalizing the PCs much. The telekinesis was particularly useful since he could push fighters away again on his second turn (for a total of 40'). In fact, I was also able to use it to prevent a charge. Neat ability, particularly for a group of experienced players like mine.
3) Did you reduce V's eye stalks by one, to account for the eye graft to Thifirane? If so, how did you deal with T's eye ray (ie. did she just have one ray ability, or could she cycle through them like the revised beholder can)?
I didn't think through these issues because I didn't remember it until the day we were going to play. So, I played Thifirane as written but V as having all eyestalks. My players failed to notice the inconsistency (as with the petrified monsters). I suppose you could take away a ray, but then how would V open all the Oblivion doors?
If you really wanted to underline the alliance, I suppose you could maybe include a book that describes a ritual by which a beholder can use it's own blood to create a beholder-like eye on another creature?
Hope that helps. Good luck!
Here's a version I just came up with after reading Mearls' revision and KR's version. It struck me that you could consider each power a lesser version of the save or die power. Each ray could retain the save or die affect a function of a critical hit. This way all the classic flavor is retained without constant save or die attacks. I arbitrarily boosted the saves DCs to reflect their rarity and the high level of the encounter and spread out the types of saves as well. (This is mostly just a cut and paste of Mearls' and Keith Richmond's versions so thanks to them.)
Beholder CR 14
Usually LE Large Aberration
Init +6 (Sustained Barrage);
Senses darkvision 60 ft.;
Listen +23, Spot +33
Languages Common, Undercommon, Abyssal, Infernal
AC 26, touch 11, flat-footed 24 (+2 Dex, -1 size, +15 natural);
hp 153 (18 HD)
Fort +12, Ref +8, Will +15
Speed 5 ft. (1 square), fly 20 ft. (good); Flyby Attack
Melee bite +16 (3d8+6)
Ranged 10 eye rays +14 each (special)
Atk Options Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot
Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
Base Atk +13; Grp +21
Special Actions Spell Disruption Eye
Abilities Str 18, Dex 14, Con 18, Int 17, Wis 15, Cha 15
SQ All-around vision
Feats Flyby Attack, Great Fortitude, Improved Initiative, Improved Natural Attack (Bite), Iron Will, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot
Skills Hide +12, Knowledge (Arcana) +17, Listen +23, Move Silently +16, Search +34, Spot +33
Advancement 19-36 HD
Spell Disruption Eye: The beholder can focus its large, central eye on an area, disrupting all spellcasting that takes place there. As a swift action, the beholder creates a 60 foot cone. Anyone in this area who attempts to cast a spell must make a caster level check (DC 25) to successfully complete the spell. This DC is Intelligence based and includes a +7 racial bonus.
Rays: 9 rays per round (Max 3x for each ray. Max three rays per target), Plus 1 Barrage
Stun 1rnd (Will DC25, Dominate on Critical Hit)
Telekinesis: Push 20ft (Ref DC25, 40ft on Critical Hit)
Disintigrate: 6d6 dmg(Acid) (Disintigrate on Critical Hit, Fort DC25)
Petrification: Slow until successful Save (Will DC25, Flesh to Stone on Critical Hit)
Death: 4d8 dmg(Necromantic) (Finger of Death on Critical Hit Fort DC25)
Barrrage: A radiant 20ft explosion of Magical Force, Requires 2 Saves: Fort DC20 (2d8 dmg), Ref DC20 (Knocked Prone)
I really, really like that. My only critique would be that the critical will be pretty rare; Maybe one every other round?
I would maybe give him some sort of improved critical that allows them to at least do it on 19 and 20, particularly if you are requiring a confirm for the magical effect.
well I figure if he's rolling 9 times a round crits are gonna come up. But then at my table we don't roll to confirm. Nat 20's! Improved Crit seems like a good adjustment though.
Today I ran the Vhalantru encounter using Durn's template. The fight lasted about five rounds -- a bit faster than I'd hoped -- but it carried the requisite amount of fear and excitement, and several PCs were pushed to the brink. Thanks for helping to make it work.
If others adopt this template, I strongly recommend using Improved Critical instead of one of the other feats.