Qualifying for Beholder Mage...

[ZiggZagg]

Ok, so I have seen a few threads now where a build or a character actually being played has levels in Beholder Mage...but they aren't a Beholder. I have seen humans, Elans, and I think even one elf...how exactly is this being done?

[Kobold-Bard]

Ok, so I have seen a few threads now where a build or a character actually being played has levels in Beholder Mage...but they aren't a Beholder. I have seen humans, Elans, and I think even one elf...how exactly is this being done?

1. Use Polymorph Any Object x2 (once to turn from whatever you are to a Beholder, the second to turn from a Beholder into a Beholder which becomes permanent based on the factors given in the spell description). Scrolls are 3000gp apiece so can be acquired at fairly low level, and used just as soon assuming you have someone with a good UMD score in the party.

2. Take the feat Assume Supernatural Ability twice, once for (Antimagic Eye) and the other for (Eye Rays). The feat is in Savage Species and since it was never updated to 3.5 is still allowed material.

3. Stab out newly Aquired antimagic Eye and proceed to take levels in Beholder Mage.

4. ???

5. PROFIT!!

6. Wake up in hospital after the DM throws a book at you and storms out.

[ZiggZagg]

Wow...you can make polymorph permanent with cheese like that? Fascinating. So what sane DM allows this sort of thing?

[Kobold-Bard]

Wow...you can make polymorph permanent with cheese like that? Fascinating. So what sane DM allows this sort of thing?

None. Thats why he threw a book at you and you ended up in hospital for trying to do this :smalltongue:

[Urpriest]

A common variant is to use the Metamorphic Transfer feat from Expanded Psionics, if you want to avoid using unupdated 3.0 material.

[ZiggZagg]

But in the case of the feat, does the power allow you to stay in the Beholder's form? The feat says you are only able to use the assumed ability 3 times a day, which seems a bit counter productive. In any case, I'm still not understanding how this is legal in any form other than the loosest restrictions and guidelines. It's insane that this seems to be accepted as "legal"

[Urpriest]

The reason you take Metamorphic Transfer or Assume Supernatural Ability is because Beholder Mage doesn't just require you to be a beholder (which is satisfied by stacking polymorph any object), it requires you to sacrifice your antimagic eye and eye rays. Since both are supernatural abilities, a DM might argue that you need to actually have the abilities, not merely the body parts, to take the class. Metamorphic Transfer only lets you use the ability 3/day, but it's arguable that sacrificing that counts as "sacrificing your antimagic eye".

[ZiggZagg]

Wow...even worse rules abuse. And people have actually played these sorts of characters?

[Jack_Simth]

Wow...even worse rules abuse. And people have actually played these sorts of characters?

Not that I'm aware of. Besides, it doesn't work anyway on at least two counts:

1) Stop and read the PrC header in the DMG.
2) The Beholder Mage PrC specifies that you must be a 'True beholder'. Polymorphic magic doesn't necessarily count.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

A common variant is to use the Metamorphic Transfer feat from Expanded Psionics, if you want to avoid using unupdated 3.0 material.

Beholder Mage is unupdated 3.0 material.


Your PAO scrolls are caster level 15, so any Dispel check against you that beats a DC 26 will cause you to lose all of your Beholder Mage class features until you can turn back into one. Entering an AMF or dead magic area also causes you to lose the form temporarily, and technically you'll also lose all of your prepared spells until you've rested again. Dead magic doorways and frequent dispels are an easy counter to anyone taking this class, as it will end up being more trouble than it's worth.


2) The Beholder Mage PrC specifies that you must be a 'True beholder'. Polymorphic magic doesn't necessarily count.

No it doesn't. The prestige class never gets any more specific than just plain 'beholder' so polymorph will indeed qualify you for it.

[Kobold-Bard]

Wow...even worse rules abuse. And people have actually played these sorts of characters?

Maybe once. For 1 round of combat. Then the DM dropped a load of rocks and told them all to roll Commoners.

Stuff like this is never meant to be played, it's just there to stand as a testament to the careless wording of the D&D staff/ingenuity of a D&D player with too much time on their hands.

[Oslecamo]

Not that I'm aware of. Besides, it doesn't work anyway on at least two counts:

1) Stop and read the PrC header in the DMG.
2) The Beholder Mage PrC specifies that you must be a 'True beholder'. Polymorphic magic doesn't necessarily count.

Rule nº59 of the extra-cheese handbook it's that any not 120% clear rule interaction means whatever you want it to mean.:smalltongue:

[ZiggZagg]

Unupdated Material? Isn't it in the 3.5 source, Lords of Madness? That's where I saw it, anyway.

In any case, good to hear that it's easy to counter with Dispel and Antimagic Field. Even better to hear that it is USUALLY only theoretical from the optimization forums. The stuff they come up with...

[FelixG]

Not that I'm aware of. Besides, it doesn't work anyway on at least two counts:

1) Stop and read the PrC header in the DMG.
2) The Beholder Mage PrC specifies that you must be a 'True beholder'. Polymorphic magic doesn't necessarily count.

You are not beholderkin, you are a beholder (perminantly after PaO x2) so i would say it qualifies even if cheesy


Unupdated Material? Isn't it in the 3.5 source, Lords of Madness? That's where I saw it, anyway.


Lords of Madness is 3.5...he is just being...special :D

[Shadowleaf]

Unupdated Material? Isn't it in the 3.5 source, Lords of Madness? That's where I saw it, anyway.

In any case, good to hear that it's easy to counter with Dispel and Antimagic Field. Even better to hear that it is USUALLY only theoretical from the optimization forums. The stuff they come up with...S/He meant Savage Species, which is 3.0.

Edit: Also, permanent change is permanent.

[Zaydos]

S/He meant Savage Species, which is 3.0.

Monsters of Faerun actually. Even Savage Species didn't have that cheese (it did have Illithid Savant).

[Urpriest]

By the way, it's not just the "permanently polymorphed into a beholder" bit that lets you qualify. Under stricter readings you need to use polymorph any object because other polymorph spells give you "the form of" the creature, rather than actually turning you into one. Only polymorph any object lacks that kind of wording, so TO people interpret it to mean that it actually lets you qualify for stuff.

Personally, I would argue that if you're permanently polymorphed into a creature (and not just taking its form) then you gain its level adjustment, which means that a beholder mage immediately becomes an NPC. Your next character must fight the DM's new villain. Have fun!

[Dusk Eclipse]

To deal with th dispel-ness of polymorph any objetc, pay a dwomer keeper to cast the PAO on you as a supernatural ability, which IIRC are not subject to normal dispelling

[Kobold-Bard]

Rule nº59 of the extra-cheese handbook it's that any not 120% clear rule interaction means whatever you want it to mean.:smalltongue:

13 levels of your Beholder class also gets them the pre-reqs for BM.

Of course by then you can't finish the class pre-epic, but it's still doable.

Edit:

...

Personally, I would argue that if you're permanently polymorphed into a creature (and not just taking its form) then you gain its level adjustment, which means that a beholder mage immediately becomes an NPC. Your next character must fight the DM's new villain. Have fun!

Don't even joke about using LA that big in-game :smalleek:

See Oslecamo's sig for the monster class homebrew that is redefining the "playing as monsters" industry!!! (Seriously though, check them out. They rock.)

[liquid150]

Not that I'm aware of. Besides, it doesn't work anyway on at least two counts:

1) Stop and read the PrC header in the DMG.
2) The Beholder Mage PrC specifies that you must be a 'True beholder'. Polymorphic magic doesn't necessarily count.

1. I'm not sure what you are talking about here.
2. True Beholder = not beholderkin. Since you used Polymorph Any Object, you are both the type and subtype of the beholder, you are in all ways physically a beholder.

So yes, it works. But no sane DM allows it.

[Tyndmyr]

2. Take the feat Assume Supernatural Ability twice, once for (Antimagic Eye) and the other for (Eye Rays). The feat is in Savage Species and since it was never updated to 3.5 is still allowed material.

Note that this assumes you can take eye rays once, as a single feat, and give them up individually for casting. This is questionable....but doesn't actually stop beholder mage 100%. Even if a different feat is required for each eye ray, it's still possible, via chaos shuffle and other related cheese. It's horribly cheesy, but hey...it's beholder mage. If you're going into this, cheese can be assumed.

The "true beholder" is like "true dragon". It refers to the type, preventing misc beholderkin from qualifying. PaO does fix this, so it will get you into the class.

And yes, if you actually gain beholder level adjust, that's kind of a drag.

[FMArthur]

Beholder Mage is flat-out broken in every way including its requirements. The game falls apart around it.

I don't know why so many people have such difficulty accepting that some of WotC's D&D designers really can make mistakes, some things really are overpowering and are only averted by player honor, houserules or bannings. I mean, what is the actual goal in trying to prove that things which certainly work don't actually work by some intentional misinterpretation of the rules? Polymorph Any Object is one of the most broken spells in the game, and the 'buy a spell from a caster' (or scroll, more expensively) mechanic is also blatantly overpowering on account of the designers seriously and bafflingly not understanding how strong the spells are. Beholder Mage is merely a corollary of that. Metamorphic Transfer is again, unambiguous. There is no ambiguity here at all.

Multiple nightsticks don't interact with each other in any diminishing way. Dragonwrought Kobolds can take [epic] feats and can be venerable at no penalty. Erudites technically get a stupid number of unique powers per day. Beholder Mage is possible to enter as a player. It all works, but is grossly overpowering, so don't do it or let it happen. That's where this all ends, every time.

EDIT: Guess not! Didn't really know about that one.

[Kobold-Bard]

1. I'm not sure what you are talking about here.
2. True Beholder = not beholderkin. Since you used Polymorph Any Object, you are both the type and subtype of the beholder, you are in all ways physically a beholder.

So yes, it works. But no sane DM allows it.
1. Its a section that says all PrCs are at the discretion of the DM. I think that's what they're referring to.

Note that this assumes you can take eye rays once, as a single feat, and give them up individually for casting. This is questionable....but doesn't actually stop beholder mage 100%. Even if a different feat is required for each eye ray, it's still possible, via chaos shuffle and other related cheese. It's horribly cheesy, but hey...it's beholder mage. If you're going into this, cheese can be assumed.

...

They come under the single heading of Eye Rays (Su) (or thereabouts) in the MM. One ability, lotsa uses.

[ZiggZagg]

Dragonwrought Kobolds can take Epic feats? I knew the Venerable trick, but not that one. How does that bastardization of the rules work?

[Kobold-Bard]

Dragonwrought Kobolds can take Epic feats? I knew the Venerable trick, but not that one. How does that bastardization of the rules work?

Thanks to either Races of Dragons or Draconomicon (I forget which) True Dragons (ie. creatures with the Dragon type) may automatically take Epic Feats when Old or older.

Dragonwrought Kobolds have the Dragon type and may begin as Old or older.....

[Urpriest]

Dragonwrought Kobolds can take Epic feats? I knew the Venerable trick, but not that one. How does that bastardization of the rules work?

They refer to themselves using the same age categories as True Dragons, so some argue that they count as True Dragons, and thus can gain epic feats once Old. I think it's one of the flimsier TO arguments, as I'm not aware of any rule that says that everything that shares the True Dragon age categories is a True Dragon.

[Urpriest]

Thanks to either Races of Dragons or Draconomicon (I forget which) True Dragons (ie. creatures with the Dragon type) may automatically take Epic Feats when Old or older.

Dragonwrought Kobolds have the Dragon type and may begin as Old or older.....

False. Wyverns are not True Dragons. Neither are Pseudodragons. It takes more than the Dragon type to be a True Dragon.

[ZiggZagg]

Wow, that's impressive, since they are trying to refer to themselves as both vernable, which is a humanoid age category, and Old in dragon terms, which seem to have separate age categories altogether. So, instantly, I called debunked. LoL

[FMArthur]

Ok then that one doesn't work. My mistake. :smallredface:
The rest do, though.

edit:

Wow, that's impressive, since they are trying to refer to themselves as both vernable, which is a humanoid age category, and Old in dragon terms, which seem to have separate age categories altogether. So, instantly, I called debunked. LoL
Actually, you are completely wrong here. Take a gander at Races of the Dragon page 39. :smallwink:

[liquid150]

False. Wyverns are not True Dragons. Neither are Pseudodragons. It takes more than the Dragon type to be a True Dragon.

You must also gain power with age, and Dragonwrought Kobolds do (increase in INT/WIS/CHA with no age penalties). Thus they are true dragons.

[Kobold-Bard]

False. Wyverns are not True Dragons. Neither are Pseudodragons. It takes more than the Dragon type to be a True Dragon.

Awww, poor Pseudodragons :smallfrown:

[Urpriest]

You must also gain power with age, and Dragonwrought Kobolds do (increase in INT/WIS/CHA with no age penalties). Thus they are true dragons.

Rules reference? While all True Dragons gain power with age categories, I'm not aware of any rule stating that all Dragons that gain power with age categories are True Dragons.

[WinWin]

Why polymorph into a beholder when you could polymorph into a beholder with a template? Like the Mindwitness (Half Illithid Beholder) from Underdark.

That way you could qualify for Beholder mage and Illithid Savant.

[Paganboy28]

Sometimes when I read these forums I can feel myself morphing into a mouse there is so much cheese. :smallbiggrin:

I mean... sometimes yes things are possible "within the rules" but are they in the spirit of the game?

Are there really any DM's out there who allow such awfully obvious cheesy-broken characters and if so WHY WHY WHY?

[The Glyphstone]

Sometimes when I read these forums I can feel myself morphing into a mouse there is so much cheese. :smallbiggrin:

I mean... sometimes yes things are possible "within the rules" but are they in the spirit of the game?

Are there really any DM's out there who allow such awfully obvious cheesy-broken characters and if so WHY WHY WHY?

No, that's why it's called Theoretical Optimization (TO). No one actually tries to play these sorts of characters, the entire point is to see what sort of interesting balloon animals you can make out of the rules. Then you put it down and go play a sane character (Practical Optimization).

A Spirit Lion Barbarian with Shock Trooper and Leap Attack is PO.
The Hulking Hurler is TO.

[Jack_Simth]

No it doesn't. The prestige class never gets any more specific than just plain 'beholder' so polymorph will indeed qualify you for it.Lords of Madness, page 43, upper-left hand corner; Entry Requirements: "Race: True beholder (beholderkin cannot become beholder mages)."

Yes, it does say "True beholder". Kindly do not imply I am a liar.


Why polymorph into a beholder when you could polymorph into a beholder with a template? Like the Mindwitness (Half Illithid Beholder) from Underdark.

That way you could qualify for Beholder mage and Illithid Savant.
Because Polymorph Any Object (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorphAnyObject.htm) inherits from Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorph.htm), which inherits from Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm), which specifies "You cannot take the form of any creature with a template, even if that template doesn’t change the creature type or subtype". Nothing in Polymorph or Polymorph Any Object overrides that restriction.


The "true beholder" is like "true dragon". It refers to the type, preventing misc beholderkin from qualifying. PaO does fix this, so it will get you into the class.
You're relying on the DM giving you exactly the interpretation you like. A DM can totally say "No, Polymorph Any Object doesn't make you a 'True' beholder, just a beholder" and be totally, completely, and utterly within the rules as written.



1. I'm not sure what you are talking about here.
Then go read the opening for the section on PrC's in the DMG. That'll clarify. But if you don't want to open up your copy of the DMG when it's referenced:

DMG, page 176, left column, paragraph just before "Definition of Terms":

Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign. The example prestige classes are certainly not all encompassing or definitive. They might not even be appropriate for your campaign. The best prestige classes for your campaign are the ones you tailor make yourself.

AKA, the DM can simply say "no", and it's not even making use of rule 0.


2. True Beholder = not beholderkin. Since you used Polymorph Any Object, you are both the type and subtype of the beholder, you are in all ways physically a beholder.That's one interpretation, but you're relying on the DM giving you exactly the interpretation you like. A DM can totally say "No, Polymorph Any Object doesn't make you a 'True' beholder, just a beholder" and be totally, completely, and utterly within the rules as written.


You are not beholderkin, you are a beholder (perminantly after PaO x2) so i would say it qualifies even if cheesy
If you're attempting this as a player then you're reliant on the DM for certain rulings. One of which is the interpretation of what "True beholder" means.


Rule nº59 of the extra-cheese handbook it's that any not 120% clear rule interaction means whatever you want it to mean.:smalltongue:
Ah. Theoretical Optimization rules, right.

[The Glyphstone]

Lords of Madness, page 43, upper-left hand corner; Entry Requirements: "Race: True beholder (beholderkin cannot become beholder mages)."

Yes, it does say "True beholder".

So the question becomes, do beholders count as True beholders? There is no specific definition in LoM for a "True Beholder' other than the obvious one. The whole point becomes moot if the answer is no, though, because then nothing can be a beholder mage, not even a beholder...

[FMArthur]

Why polymorph into a beholder when you could polymorph into a beholder with a template? Like the Mindwitness (Half Illithid Beholder) from Underdark.

That way you could qualify for Beholder mage and Illithid Savant.

Being a half-illithid doesn't qualify you for Illithid Savant at all. And this clause, which I just read in PHBII's short "Polymorph Subschool" changes, implies that templated creatures are probably out of the scope of even mighty PAO:

The spellcaster can freely designate the new form’s minor physical qualities (such as hair color and skin color) within the normal ranges for a creature of that kind. The new form’s significant physical qualities (such as height, weight, and gender) are also under the spellcaster’s control, but they must fall within the norms for the new form’s kind.

Anyway, Savage Species doesn't have any clause about losing class features from losing the entry requirements, which is something that only CW and CA prestige classes do as far as I know. So you could use PAO to be an Illithid Savant and keep its abilities while in Beholder form. Illithid Savant is probably the best way to get Planar Bubble, but I would rather just go into Dweomerkeeper itself for the full 10 levels than take another 4 levels of Illithid Savant to steal a Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell, since Dweomerkeeper will progress Beholder Mage anyway. So with Supernatural Spell and 3 Cleric levels (also to qualify for Dweomerkeeper) with Initiate of Mystra, your PAOs will stick, permanently. Planar Bubble ripped from the mind of a Planar Shepherd will let you access that 10:1 time plane, granting you 10 turns for every 1 your foes get. 10 turns with obscene Beholder Mage casting.

You might want to get some form of divination protection before this, because as the most powerful creature ever to live, you might attract a fair amount of attention while you build up your powers. Additionally, to keep the populace in line without having to lay waste to large groups of them regularly, you would be best off coming up with some incredible disguise to look humanoid before taking your seat as grand emperor of the material plane.

[Zaydos]

So the question becomes, do beholders count as True beholders? There is no specific definition in LoM for a "True Beholder' other than the obvious one. The whole point becomes moot if the answer is no, though, because then nothing can be a beholder mage, not even a beholder...

According to each other? Usually not.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Here I was looking at the Monsters of Faerun version this whole time.

According to LoM page 41 under 'Beholder Variants' it explains that no beholder regards any other than itself as a 'true beholder' anyway. Thus, 'true beholder' becomes subjective and entirely a matter of opinion, but luckily they went into greater detail in saying that beholderkin do not qualify. As long as you PAO into a beholder and not a beholderkin, you should qualify just fine until some other beholder comes along and nitpicks your appearance.

As for the polymorph subschool, it specifically says that spells which were in print before the creation of that subschool still stand as-is. Alter Self, Polymorph, PAO, and Shapechange, along with a handful of other spells outside of core, are exempt from anything that the rules of the polymorph subschool says. Those spells do have a built-in clause disallowing templated forms, but that's not because of the polymorph subschool.

The mention of losing the class features of a prestige class once you fail to meet its prerequisites is not limited to only the prestige classes printed in the books which state that. It is an additional rule which applies to all prestige classes, no printing states or even implies otherwise. No matter the source of a prestige class, if you no longer meet its prerequisites you will lose its benefits.

[liquid150]

Rules reference? While all True Dragons gain power with age categories, I'm not aware of any rule stating that all Dragons that gain power with age categories are True Dragons.


True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older.

There you go.

[The Glyphstone]

According to LoM page 41 under 'Beholder Variants' it explains that no beholder regards any other than itself as a 'true beholder' anyway. Thus, 'true beholder' becomes subjective and entirely a matter of opinion, but luckily they went into greater detail in saying that beholderkin do not qualify. As long as you PAO into a beholder and not a beholderkin, you should qualify just fine until some other beholder comes along and nitpicks your appearance.


So you'd want Greater Celerity as one of your spells, to ensure that you 'go first' in any conversation to stop the other beholder from taking away your class features.:smallcool:

Beholder Mages, Highlander-style. There can be only one!

[liquid150]

You're relying on the DM giving you exactly the interpretation you like. A DM can totally say "No, Polymorph Any Object doesn't make you a 'True' beholder, just a beholder" and be totally, completely, and utterly within the rules as written.




Then go read the opening for the section on PrC's in the DMG. That'll clarify. But if you don't want to open up your copy of the DMG when it's referenced:
I did read it, and nothing that I read was relevant to the discussion at hand.


DMG, page 176, left column, paragraph just before "Definition of Terms":


AKA, the DM can simply say "no", and it's not even making use of rule 0.
Yeah, okay. At least this time you explained yourself rather than expecting people to read your mind.


That's one interpretation, but you're relying on the DM giving you exactly the interpretation you like. A DM can totally say "No, Polymorph Any Object doesn't make you a 'True' beholder, just a beholder" and be totally, completely, and utterly within the rules as written.

A vast number of beholderkin exist. Not true beholders, these creatures do not share the race’s xenophobia, although most are still quite evil and cruel in nature. True beholders consider beholderkin to be abominations.
"True Beholder" means "beholder" excluding "beholderkin." Any actual beholder is a true beholder. This includes Elder Orbs and Hive Mothers, even though they have different abilities than a standard Beholder.

If you're attempting this as a player then you're reliant on the DM for certain rulings. One of which is the interpretation of what "True beholder" means.
Which is fairly explicitly obvious and not as subjective as you'd like to think.

Is it up to a DM to allow a player to use the class? Yes. Is the definition of "true beholder" subjective and subject to interpretation? No, it isn't.

[Urpriest]

There you go.

Hmm. I'd still argue that that's a descriptive sentence, not a proscriptive one (like "undead are creatures that lack a constitution score"). Still, the wording is such that it could legitimately be read as a definition. Dragoncheese appears to be within RAW, though it just as legitimately can be read as illegal.

[Tyndmyr]

They refer to themselves using the same age categories as True Dragons, so some argue that they count as True Dragons, and thus can gain epic feats once Old. I think it's one of the flimsier TO arguments, as I'm not aware of any rule that says that everything that shares the True Dragon age categories is a True Dragon.

Well, that's not all that's required to be a true dragon, yes. Hence the necessity of Dragonwrought, which changes your type to Dragon. It's kind of a convenient little package, but there are other, more complicated ways of becoming a true dragon too. As long as you get the dragon type, and become more powerful as you advance in age, you're golden.

And Dragonwrought kobolds are definitely true dragons, as they meet the criteria for such explicitly laid out in Draconomicon(that's your reference, Urpriest). I believe that much was actually intentional by the designers of Dragonwrought kobold, though some of the ridiculous combinations were almost certainly not forseen. Most of the epic feats are, while technically accessible, not usable due to the other requirements. You need pretty strong cheese to abuse the epic stuff significantly.

Jack_Simth, PaO explicitly transforms you into what the target is. Permanently, if cast twice. You now are, for all intents and purposes, whatever you changed into. I would argue that this includes LA, personally, which makes the beholder trick much less useful. After all, you can't pick and choose what attributes of the creature you get when you become them.

And of course, the DM can always say no. That's hardly the point of this.

[FMArthur]

Well, that's not all that's required to be a true dragon, yes. Hence the necessity of Dragonwrought, which changes your type to Dragon. It's kind of a convenient little package, but there are other, more complicated ways of becoming a true dragon too. As long as you get the dragon type, and become more powerful as you advance in age, you're golden.

And Dragonwrought kobolds are definitely true dragons, as they meet the criteria for such explicitly laid out in Draconomicon(that's your reference, Urpriest). I believe that much was actually intentional by the designers of Dragonwrought kobold, though some of the ridiculous combinations were almost certainly not forseen. Most of the epic feats are, while technically accessible, not usable due to the other requirements. You need pretty strong cheese to abuse the epic stuff significantly.

Jack_Simth, PaO explicitly transforms you into what the target is. Permanently, if cast twice. You now are, for all intents and purposes, whatever you changed into. I would argue that this includes LA, personally, which makes the beholder trick much less useful. After all, you can't pick and choose what attributes of the creature you get when you become them.

And of course, the DM can always say no. That's hardly the point of this.

Beholders don't have a level adjustment.


As for the polymorph subschool, it specifically says that spells which were in print before the creation of that subschool still stand as-is. Alter Self, Polymorph, PAO, and Shapechange, along with a handful of other spells outside of core, are exempt from anything that the rules of the polymorph subschool says. Those spells do have a built-in clause disallowing templated forms, but that's not because of the polymorph subschool.

This here is not true. The additional rules from the Polymorph Subschool apply to all spells within it except where the particular spell contradicts them. Anything introduced with the Polymorph subschool that is not contradicted by the spell is still included, even if one part is different.

[Tyndmyr]

Beholders don't have a level adjustment.

Good point, in 3.5, they are LA -. Clearly, WOTC never intended them to be PCs.

And even if a DM did, in a fit of madness, let you start out as one(as opposed to PaO), the RHD issue would kill beholder off. It's really just a PaO problem, along with the assumed lack of LA for LA -.

[Urpriest]

Good point, in 3.5, they are LA -. Clearly, WOTC never intended them to be PCs.

And even if a DM did, in a fit of madness, let you start out as one(as opposed to PaO), the RHD issue would kill beholder off. It's really just a PaO problem, along with the assumed lack of LA for LA -.

I read LA - as meaning that such a being is automatically an NPC. Certain LA - templates can be applied to player characters during a game, and they always place the character under the DM's control. Thus a person who gains the level adjustment of a beholder would become the DM's new villain.

[FMArthur]

Good thing no one's going to gain its level adjustment, then. Or the level adjustment of any other creature acquired through PAO cheese.

Why would you allow polymorph cheese to begin with? :smallconfused:

[Alleran]

By the way, it's not just the "permanently polymorphed into a beholder" bit that lets you qualify. Under stricter readings you need to use polymorph any object because other polymorph spells give you "the form of" the creature, rather than actually turning you into one. Only polymorph any object lacks that kind of wording, so TO people interpret it to mean that it actually lets you qualify for stuff.
So what happens if you permanently polymorph into a Beholder, do everything to qualify, take the class, and then permanently polymorph yourself into something else instead, like a dragon? Do you then lose the benefits of the Beholder Mage, since you're no longer technically a beholder? Or do you get to keep them?

I'm kind of leaning towards keeping them, because otherwise you would also technically lose the benefits if you shapechange/polymorph into something else (since while you're something else, you aren't a beholder).

[WinWin]

So what happens if you permanently polymorph into a Beholder, do everything to qualify, take the class, and then permanently polymorph yourself into something else instead, like a dragon? Do you then lose the benefits of the Beholder Mage, since you're no longer technically a beholder? Or do you get to keep them?

I'm kind of leaning towards keeping them, because otherwise you would also technically lose the benefits if you shapechange/polymorph into something else (since while you're something else, you aren't a beholder).

You would retain the PrC, however, you would not be able to use some or all of the benefits of the PrC without being a beholder. Just because you no longer qualify does not mean you lose the class features. It may change how those class features function, if at all (sorry for reapeating myself).

Kind of like how a mindwitness can utilize the benefits of illithid savant without actually being a mind flayer...Unfortunately the only way to become a mindwitness is via shapechange (persisted) or ceramorphasis. That makes me sad. If you are capable of either of those methods, being a beholder mage is not really going to break the game...

[Alleran]

You would retain the PrC, however, you would not be able to use some or all of the benefits of the PrC without being a beholder. Just because you no longer qualify does not mean you lose the class features. It may change how those class features function, if at all (sorry for reapeating myself).
So given my current reading of the PrC, you would retain spellcasting (since you had the eye rays via Assume Supernatural Ability - which required spending character resources to gain - and then put them out to gain that spellcasting) and possibly the mage hand ability, but would likely lose the Ocular Transformation capstone.

Okay, now I'm really wondering about putting together a human that turned himself into a dragon after picking up ten levels of Beholder Mage (by turning himself into a Beholder).

[fortesama]

I think the incidents referred to by the TC was those that happened to the one's I joined in. I played one for a bit too see what would happen in practice (and I think i did a pretty good job of behaving myself; used everything mostly for buffs and debuffs and let the other wizard do the broken stuff).

My friend who tried it abused it's ability to cast a lot of stuff when he does remember that it could do that but tends to keep picking all the wrong spells in all the wrong places (i mean, why cast Brilliant Blade against a horde of undead, or enervation on a vampire, or dropped a cloudkill on the orcish horde when the our fighters were grappling the odd mage in their group?).

All in all, it was decided, as an unofficial house rule, that we avoid that class due to it's potential for abuse and the headaches to maintain one (what random village would allow a big scary monster to float around in their midst, short of the crazy ones?).

[Alleran]

(what random village would allow a big scary monster to float around in their midst, short of the crazy ones?)
Polymorph.