1. A creature with access to tk can use it on themselves, but a beholder probably weighs more than 300 lbs, so I'd say no to tk flight.
2. Beholders can disintegrate non-magical weapons, yes. Their preference is to disintegrate the archer, though. The way a beholder negates long range weapons is by making sure no corridors in their lair are longer than 120 feet.
2. Can a beholder disintegrate a weapon? (to negate 150ft. range on longbows.)
2.5. Would the wielder make a save?
If the archer is out of range, so is the bow, but if in range, targeting worn or wielded equipment, with certain special exceptions, is not addressed by the rules but tends to produce poor game play if allowed.
The problem with disintegrating a player's weapon is that, if their weapon is destroyed... what do they do then? If weapon destruction is a common threat within your game then your players might plan ahead for that, but the problem with just having one creature do that suddenly is that the player's won't be prepared for it. So you could find yourself in a situation where your character who has their whole character specced around a specific weapon now have nothing to do in a major battle. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing... that sudden challenge could make things much more interesting and engaging for your players, but you have to know ahead of time that your players are going to appreciate the challenge and won't just feel like they're not being allowed to play their character.
The other problem is, once you establish that disintegration rays can be used to destroy equipment held by a creature, that opens up your players to pull the same trick on your creatures. So suddenly you either need to give every enemy they come across magic equipment, or just say, "Nah, it only works like that when I do it", which has a tendency to feel cheap.
As to the question of how to actually resolve the dice rolls when it comes to the disintegration itself... I would say treat it the same as the character themselves being targeted, but give them advantage on the Saving Throw (since the Beholder is specifically targeting the much smaller target of the bow itself). If they fail the saving throw, the character takes no damage but their bow is destroyed instead.
The other problem is, once you establish that disintegration rays can be used to destroy equipment held by a creature, that opens up your players to pull the same trick on your creatures. So suddenly you either need to give every enemy they come across magic equipment, or just say, "Nah, it only works like that when I do it", which has a tendency to feel cheap.
Eh, by the time PCs are using disintegration any targets where it's worthwhile to target their weapons instead of them are probably using magic weapons. Then again, that mostly applies to PCs as well; an archer in a party at a level where a beholder is reasonable opposition likely has a magic bow.
The big problem with sunder as it worked in 3.5e was that you didn't want to use it as a PC because PCs had a money budget (so destroying potential loot was a big problem, as was getting your own stuff destroyed), while NPCs generally don't.
1. Can a beholder use telekinesis on itself? (to improve its lowly speed)
2. Can a beholder disintegrate a weapon? (to negate 150ft. range on longbows.)
2.5. Would the wielder make a save?
1. A creature with access to tk can use it on themselves, but a beholder probably weighs more than 300 lbs, so I'd say no to tk flight.
2. Beholders can disintegrate non-magical weapons, yes. Their preference is to disintegrate the archer, though. The way a beholder negates long range weapons is by making sure no corridors in their lair are longer than 120 feet.
There is no weight limit for creatures.
If the archer is out of range, so is the bow, but if in range, targeting worn or wielded equipment, with certain special exceptions, is not addressed by the rules but tends to produce poor game play if allowed.
The problem with disintegrating a player's weapon is that, if their weapon is destroyed... what do they do then? If weapon destruction is a common threat within your game then your players might plan ahead for that, but the problem with just having one creature do that suddenly is that the player's won't be prepared for it. So you could find yourself in a situation where your character who has their whole character specced around a specific weapon now have nothing to do in a major battle. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing... that sudden challenge could make things much more interesting and engaging for your players, but you have to know ahead of time that your players are going to appreciate the challenge and won't just feel like they're not being allowed to play their character.
The other problem is, once you establish that disintegration rays can be used to destroy equipment held by a creature, that opens up your players to pull the same trick on your creatures. So suddenly you either need to give every enemy they come across magic equipment, or just say, "Nah, it only works like that when I do it", which has a tendency to feel cheap.
As to the question of how to actually resolve the dice rolls when it comes to the disintegration itself... I would say treat it the same as the character themselves being targeted, but give them advantage on the Saving Throw (since the Beholder is specifically targeting the much smaller target of the bow itself). If they fail the saving throw, the character takes no damage but their bow is destroyed instead.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I think any reading of the Beholder entry that allows it to move a living elephant but not a dead one is probably a bad reading.
Eh, by the time PCs are using disintegration any targets where it's worthwhile to target their weapons instead of them are probably using magic weapons. Then again, that mostly applies to PCs as well; an archer in a party at a level where a beholder is reasonable opposition likely has a magic bow.
The big problem with sunder as it worked in 3.5e was that you didn't want to use it as a PC because PCs had a money budget (so destroying potential loot was a big problem, as was getting your own stuff destroyed), while NPCs generally don't.