Eye Tyrant

Galadrin · Post by **Galadrin** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:22 pm

Crossposted from Dragonsfoot...

I noticed that simulacrum games rarely had a large, multi-ocular floating menace. So to fill that void, here is my conversion from the "1e" and "2e" books.
EYE TYRANT

FREQUENCY: Very rare

NO. APPEARING: 1

ARMOR CLASS: 20/18/13

MOVE: 10' (Floating)

HIT DICE: 9d8+3

% IN LAIR: 80%

TREASURE TYPE: I, S, T

NO. OF ATTACKS: 1

DAMAGE/ATTACK: 2-8 (2d4)

SPECIAL ATTACKS: Magic

SPECIAL DEFENSES: Anti-magic ray

MAGIC RESISTANCE: Special

SAVES: P+M

INTELLIGENCE: Exceptional (15-16)

ALIGNMENT: Lawful evil

SIZE: L (4'-6' in diameter)

XP VALUE: 1,410+9

The eye tyrant has 10 eyestalks with a large eleventh eye and a mouth full of sharp teeth in the center of its body. Each eyestalk has its own hit point total (1d8+4 hp), while the central eye holds one third of the eye tyrant's regular hit points; loss of these hit points causes the eyestalk or central eye to cease functioning (see below). The remaining two-thirds of the regular hit points are in the body of the creature; depleting these results in the eye tyrant's death. Adult eye tyrants tend to have between 5 and 8 hit points per hit die.

When attacking the eye tyrant, determine the target of the attack randomly: 1-75% the body (AC 20), 76-85% the central eye (AC 13), 86-95% an eyestalk (AC 18) and 96-00% a smaller eye (AC13). Of the smaller eyes and eyestalks, the GM should determine randomly which specific smaller eye or eyestalk is affected.

Each round, the eye tyrant can use its central eye against victims in its forward 90 degree arc (creating a 140-yard cone wherein no magic will function), its bite attack against those in melee (to its front) and a random number of smaller eyes against any victim within clear line of fire. The number of eyestalks that can be used is determined by the frontage of the attacker; 1d4 against attackers in a 90 degree arc, 1d6 against a 180 degree arc, 1d8 against a 270 degree arc and all 10 if the eye tyrant attacked from all sides or from directly above.

Randomly determine (or simply decide) which eyestalks are used from this list:

1 Charm person spell

2 Charm monster spell

3 Sleep spell (one target)

4 Telekinesis (250 pound weight)

5 Flesh to stone spell (30-yard range)

6 Disintegrate spell (20-yard range)

7 Fear (as wand)

8 Slow spell (one target)

9 Cause serious wounds spell (50-yard range)

10 Death spell (40-yard range, single target)

A full 50% of the time, the eye tyrant is willing to hear offers (bribes) to not utterly destroy the player characters.

Thoughts?

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:27 pm

The physical description of the creature is WotC product identity, and that's why the simulacrum games and Castles & Crusades don't have this iconic creature. Castles & Crusades provides a Prismal Eye as a substitute. If I recall correctly, it's as deadly as an Eye Tyrant.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:45 pm

Traveller wrote:
The physical description of the creature is WotC product identity, and that's why the simulacrum games and Castles & Crusades don't have this iconic creature. Castles & Crusades provides a Prismal Eye as a substitute. If I recall correctly, it's as deadly as an Eye Tyrant.

Yeah, pretty much, Traveller. I think the Prismal Eye is a pretty good substitute. That said, good write-up, Galadrin!

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:51 pm

Well done Galadrin! As echoed, the unfortunately legalities are a pain. Thankfully it doesn't stop enterprising individuals such as you or I from converting the original for use in our personal games. However, I thought it was more to do with the name of the original creature as opposed to physical description. I'm far from an expert and I really haven't looked into it but I can believe that key elements of its physical description when combined together could be protected as well.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:19 pm

Indeed, I may *copy* this. Matter of fact... Thx you sir.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:31 pm

It is my considered opinion that the Prysmal Eye is more deadly than a certain rotund floating Visine commercial.

However, what the others have said is true -- some things are the property of others, and cannot be used with any sort of officialness without explicit permission for such.

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:36 pm

I wanna be a Beholder (tm) when I grow up.

Go0gleplex · Post by **Go0gleplex** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:40 pm

[quote="Breakdaddy"]I wanna be a Beholder (tm) when I grow up.[/quote]

Sounds painful...beauty always being in your eye and all that. *stocks up on the visine*

_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:19 pm

Go0gleplex wrote:
Sounds painful...beauty always being in your eye and all that. *stocks up on the visine*

/fires several beams at Go0gleplex

BzzzZZzZzZzzt!

cinderblock · Post by **cinderblock** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:34 pm

How does the old saying go "Beauty is in the eye of the *deleted by the powers of soulless corporation*, but the party is in its stomach"?

Jackal · Post by **Jackal** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:28 am

Traveller wrote:
The physical description of the creature is WotC product identity, and that's why the simulacrum games and Castles & Crusades don't have this iconic creature. Castles & Crusades provides a Prismal Eye as a substitute. If I recall correctly, it's as deadly as an Eye Tyrant.

My eye it is...the darn Prismal Eye is even beefier than any "Beholder" I've ever seen. My players hate them.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:57 am

Prismal Eyes eat beholders for breakfast. Now we need something to mop the floor with Mindflayers....
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:01 am

Is not the brain gobbler good enough?

Oh, ok, ok. They are dinner.

If a replacement critter is truly desired, I can make one no problem...

Jackal · Post by **Jackal** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:01 am

serleran wrote:
Is not the brain gobbler good enough?
Oh, ok, ok. They are dinner.

If a replacement critter is truly desired, I can make one no problem...

I never used mind flayers all that much but I wouldn't mind seeing a replacement.
_________________
Baron Greymoor
Troll Lord Games
Castles & Crusades Society

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:12 am

Thanks for the vote of confidence. We'll see. Remember, I don't think I can. legally, produce such a thing since it might be construed as "official."

ssfsx17 · Post by **ssfsx17** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:23 am

A mindflayer replacement that is not itself a ripoff of something from H.P. Lovecraft's writings would be nice.

Jackal · Post by **Jackal** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:09 am

serleran wrote:
Thanks for the vote of confidence. We'll see. Remember, I don't think I can. legally, produce such a thing since it might be construed as "official."

Good point. And no worries on my end, mind flayers have never been a big favorite of mine. The Prismal Eye is more than enough.
_________________
Baron Greymoor
Troll Lord Games
Castles & Crusades Society

Aladar · Post by **Aladar** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:49 pm

Mindflayer and Githyanki equivalents would be cool!

Although we could just use them pretty much right out of the FF.

Mindflayers always scared the pants off of us when I was playing AD&D. I had an old DM who loved to throw them at us.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:12 pm

I'm not after a mindflayer with the serial numbers rubbed off. However some sort of Lovecraftian horror to mess with players would be nice.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:36 pm

I think it's harder for WOTC to be aggressive about certain things. The Reaper Legendary Encounters Line (those pre-painted ones) has something called a 'Bathalian' ... unless that is its name. However the characteristics that make this stand out are quite unmistakenable!
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:02 pm

I was wondering something else. Necromancer gained the use of creatures one of which was the Mind Flayer. I wonder how they did that?
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

voynich · Post by **voynich** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:17 pm

necromancer games contacted wizards of the coast prior to the release of "3.5" dungeons and dragons, obtaining permission to update several pieces of their ip in the book tome of horrors; it was given within certain restrictions. when 3.5 was released, wizards reneged on some aspects, claiming total ownership of certain things, such as the mind flayer, some things about drow, carrion crawlers, et cetera -- the reaper stuff is called a bathalian (i believe it is a race of squid-headed creatures but i don't think they have the other qualities of the typical mind flayer like spell use and psionics so they are not an infringement) but may be licensed. wizards of the coast allows the use of their products, if they are licensed.

at least, that is what i remember from "d&d history."
_________________
the voynich manuscript is a mysterious illustrated book written in an indecipherable text. it is thought to have been written between 1450 and 1520. the author, script and language of the manuscript remain unknown.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:11 pm

The mind flayer in question was in a 3.5 book. Either way it doesn't matter. The Prismal Eye is better than the Beholder and I'm sure something will come up better than the MF's.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Jackal · Post by **Jackal** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 11:17 am

moriarty777 wrote:
I think it's harder for WOTC to be aggressive about certain things. The Reaper Legendary Encounters Line (those pre-painted ones) has something called a 'Bathalian' ... unless that is its name. However the characteristics that make this stand out are quite unmistakenable!
M

Considering the existence of H.P. Lovecraft and his writing, I imagine it would be pretty tough for WotC to prove a solid enough relation between Mind Flayer and "brain eating tentacled thing." But I'm not a lawyer so what do I know?
_________________
Baron Greymoor
Troll Lord Games
Castles & Crusades Society

Aladar · Post by **Aladar** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:10 pm

Didn't you know that lawyers were mythos creatures put on Earth to confuse and belittle us humans? You lose sanity every time you encounter a lawyer. Why do you think they weren't allowed to advertise for so long? But Great Cthulhu's lobbyists got around that restriction.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/

Druw · Post by **Druw** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:34 pm

Thanks

Druw