安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题
if you read any of the monster manualls you will know that they can have any appearance there "parent" drempt up abought. tho i agree with the idea that they shold have more skins, arm types and eye shapes.
eddit: i went into a outrage state befour i finished your commet. sorry.
https://www.jsigvard.com/dnd/monster.php?m=Beholder
Here's the statblock for the 5e beholder, no fireball in sight. Anyways, I'm not sure how well the Eye Rays would work as a tech. I mean, the effects themselves would totally work(enervation/death/disintegration doing varying levels of damage, slowing inflicting the ice debuff and petrification inflicting a stronger ice debuff, and so on), I don't really believe that's super balanced.
With tech, normally I get it when at the first planet, and having access to something like Disintegrate at T1-2 is a horrible idea for balance. If you tone it down to the point it's balanced, that doesn't really do Disintegrate justice(10d6 +40).
Also I prefer having all of the movement tech.
What I'm thinking is making them one handed weapons, so you can still launch several eye rays at once, but you get each one when appropriate, so no Disintegrate at iron armor. Sure, it takes away from the random nature of combat the beholder normally has, but I believe it would be better balance wise.
Edit: Oh, and also the antimagic sight destroying projectiles would be neat.