Here is a question for rules lawyers and armchair metaphysical theorists:
A PC in my campaign has a device which allows her to generate Anti-Magic shell. She is trying to hunt down a beholder.
What happens when the anti-magic shell enters the anti-magic area of the central eye of the beholder?
My working hypothesis is that the anti-magic field is not magic and is not canceled by anti-magic, but the things generating the anti magic (the device and the eye) are magic and are cancelled by anti-magic. Thus if one of the two were "off", it would be disabled and unable to turn "on" if it came within range of the other. If both were on, the one with the larger range would "win", since it would cancel the generation of the other one when it came within range before it was itself canceled.
This all assumes that the anti-magic effect of the beholder is magic and that the generation of the anti magic shell is magic, even if the shell isn't.
I am working in 1st edition, but I am interesed in hearing the perspectives of any edition on this.
Oh this kind of stuff gives me a headache. But I have to bite. I was going to say that I would be inclined to think the ray of the beholder's eye is more of an inherant ability, not so much 'magic' or 'spell-like.' But, the 2e Monstrous Manual states that the beholder can activate the 'magical powers' of its eye at will.
There is the possibility that the two would cancel one another out if both were off and then activated when both were in range of each other. They perform the exact same effect so I'm thinking the shell would disable the effect of the ray and the ray would disable the effect of the shell at the exact moment they overlapped or touched.
If one was off and the other was on, I would not allow the use of the other. Such as the ray being on and the shell being off when said PC jumped into the beholder's face. It cancels magic and spell-like effects so therefore the PC would not be able to activate the device that creates her antmagic shell. Or if the ray was off when the PC came into range and turned on her shell, then I would say the ray would not work because it is 'magical' and therefore would not be able to activate while in the confines of the shell.
Did that make any sense at all?? I think I'll go find an asprin now.
You know what you can do to break this person from mega monster hunting huh?
Have the beholder in a situation where it would gain suprise, cast it's anti-magic ray, Then have a few drow or derro slaves rush in and begin doing the Benny Hana routine on said P.C. You don't have to kill them out right, just show them that evil has a brain too. Maybe next time they'll think before they unassumingly run off on a 70 hp special attack and defence monster hunt.
You could, technically, have a beholder with a psionic wild talent. Or a mind flayer advisor or lackey. Remember, always keep em guessing !
Since the AD&D (not necessarily AD&D2 or D&D3E) description of anti-magic shell specifically mentions that it foils "gaze weapons" (p82), I would say the char is safe from the eye (any of it's eyes, actually) as long as the anti-magic is up.
If the beholder attacks first, there is quite a bit of a problem. First, it has no hit dice, just a hit point range (This causes a number of other problems, like figuring its hit probability with its bite.) The lack of hit dice makes it difficult to adjudicate how long the anti-magic effect lasts. Given that it is a special defense, I would say that it is constantly on and does not require an attack to use; and given that it is a ray, only affects on character.
The creature has one attack per round. The rules for the eyes do not specifically say that it gets one attack with each available eye. I would thus consider the possibility that it may only attack with one eyestalk per round (the anti-magic eye is not an eyestalk, nor an attack; it is a special defense.) Or it can attack with each available eyestalk. Your call as DM, since I don't see a solid answer one way or the other.
BUT, since the anti-magic ray can be assumed to work as a ray version of the area-affect spell (and I see no reason to assume otherwise,) the target of this defense cannot be targeted by any of the other eyes. This is because anti-magic shell protects against "gaze weapons."
So, unless the beholder targets the anti-magic char first, it will not be able to use any of its special attacks or defenses. It may also be unable to move, falling to the ground, depending on your interpretation of its levitation.
And no, beholders may not be psionic. They are non-psionic monsters according to AD&D.
Yes, the beholder is definately SOL if the PC gets her Anti-magic shell up and running on it first. As you point out, none of its ten attack eyes will function. I would rule that the main eye can not generate its anti-magic if it is inside an anti-magic effect. And, as you point out, the beholder's levitation would be cancelled as well, so it will be practically helpless. That is why they have servent creatures.
The 1EMMI description does not specifically say that the beholder can use more than one magic attack a round, but I do think it is implied. It says that up to four eyes can be used in any direction and all ten can be used against creatures above it. In any event I will rule that all its available eyes can go in a round. It would actually be to a beholder's advantage to be surrounded, because then it could let go with all its attacks: if its enemies are on one side only it is more limited in its response.
Yes, a creature in its anti-magic ray would be immune to its other attacks. I have decided that the anti-magic ray produced by the main eye is in effect as long as the eye is open. That is, it is not "cast" and does not have a duration, but it is a continuous effect as long as the eye is open but is turned off when the eye is closed. Thus I think beholders would train themselves to fix a target in the main eye as a defense, then shut the main eye, fire off an attack, and then open the main eye to raise their defense again. I am going to roll randomly to determine the segment in which the attack is launched: if the Pc's attack also comes in that segment the beholder is not defended by the anti-magic, but otherwise it is protected for the rest of the round, before and after.
Some of these questions may be answered in the Ecology of the Beholder article from a Dragon Mag of the 80's. I have the mag, but not with me. I hope to have it brought down here in a week or so.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
I think I'll go find an asprin now.
