3E/Pathfinder Conversion of the Vampire Bestiary

Upper_Krust · Jun 29, 2012

Hi all,

okay so the Vampire Bestiary is out for 4th Edition. But what about the proposed 3E/Pathfinder conversion?

Is anyone here (more) interested in such a book?

Its been a while since I cracked open a 3E book in earnest. So while I think I could easily convert over the main stat-blocks, I suspect I may be all at sea when I get to spell-like abilities and class levels...not to mention any Pathfinder changes over from 3E.

Plus I have also been thinking whether the basic Cannibal should be base 3 HD (as per my monster design rules from the Epic Bestiary). In my opinion they should, even if other humans are (wrongly IMO) base 1 HD.

Added to which there is the whole Minion/Standard/Elite/Solo conversion rate.

Minion 3 could be CR 1/6th I suppose.
Elite 3 could be CR 7
Solo 4 could be CR 13
Solo 11 could be CR 20

Taking flat conversion rates where 1 Level = 1 CR.

Any thoughts?

Deinos · Jul 1, 2012

I'd LOVE the book.

I definitely agree with you when you say it seems wrong that regular humanoids are just 1 hd, and that they should be 3 hd in general. Just too freakin weak, even for ordinary people. Also, 3e has (RARE) examples of humanoid-type monsters that aren't just classed-types; for instance, MM4 or MM5 I think has like 3 hobgoblins that are statted up purely as monsters. Warcasters and stuff.

I would personally not have as such steep differences between a minion 3 and solo 4; its rather hard to use CR 1/6 and CR 11 foes together in one encounter. To get the "minion effect" in 3e you just have to have rank and file monsters that are extremely likely to die in one hit, plus evasion or something.

But one thing that occurs to me is the War Chanter prestige class; its most notable ability is that it can boost allies' BAB to that of the highest ally nearby. So you could have, for instance, various boss/leader style monsters give large bonuses to otherwise semi-inept (by comparison) lower level monsters.

So a mid level witch doctor with relatively weak deathwalkers might empower them to be able to hit and save at his caster level so long as they are relatively nearby, and possibly even give them evasion; the result would be a 3e duplication of the 4e minion effect, enemies that go down in one direct hit but can still hit you and won't necessarily melt from a single fireball.

A high level chieftain with low level tribal types (who at this point, will also be dying in one hit even if they're 3 hd) might have inspire heroism or rage, some sort of tactical effect that gives a flanking bonus and improved use of cover, and so forth -- the intended net effect, again, being to permit much lower level creatures to fight at his side.

If this interests you I could flesh out some of these ideas...

Upper_Krust · Jul 1, 2012

Howdy Deinos mate!

Deinos said:
I'd LOVE the book.

Well that's at least one person then.

I definitely agree with you when you say it seems wrong that regular humanoids are just 1 hd, and that they should be 3 hd in general. Just too freakin weak, even for ordinary people. Also, 3e has (RARE) examples of humanoid-type monsters that aren't just classed-types; for instance, MM4 or MM5 I think has like 3 hobgoblins that are statted up purely as monsters. Warcasters and stuff.

I wonder if that's where I would struggle. I've gotten used to statting up humanoids as monsters rather than 'x' + class level.

I would personally not have as such steep differences between a minion 3 and solo 4; its rather hard to use CR 1/6 and CR 11 foes together in one encounter. To get the "minion effect" in 3e you just have to have rank and file monsters that are extremely likely to die in one hit, plus evasion or something.

Yes in my haste I had sort of forgotten about 3E's wider maths.

Actually thinking about the Deathwalker and Cannibal Crazy, they might convert more truly as CR 1/2 and CR 1/3 respectively. But I still would prefer a flat 3 HD, so they may both end up just being CR 1 or thereabouts.

I can't remember exactly (without the document opened in front of me) but a flat 3 HD humanoid is probably ECL 2 ish which means CR 1.

But one thing that occurs to me is the War Chanter prestige class; its most notable ability is that it can boost allies' BAB to that of the highest ally nearby. So you could have, for instance, various boss/leader style monsters give large bonuses to otherwise semi-inept (by comparison) lower level monsters.

Absolutely.

So a mid level witch doctor with relatively weak deathwalkers might empower them to be able to hit and save at his caster level so long as they are relatively nearby, and possibly even give them evasion; the result would be a 3e duplication of the 4e minion effect, enemies that go down in one direct hit but can still hit you and won't necessarily melt from a single fireball.

That could work well.

A high level chieftain with low level tribal types (who at this point, will also be dying in one hit even if they're 3 hd) might have inspire heroism or rage, some sort of tactical effect that gives a flanking bonus and improved use of cover, and so forth -- the intended net effect, again, being to permit much lower level creatures to fight at his side.

I think the Cannibal's Trait (Manic I think I called it) would work well as a Barbarian's Rage when at half hit points. The chieftain could well inspire heroism with a war cry or similar.

If this interests you I could flesh out some of these ideas...

Absolutely (assuming its not too much trouble). It would be interesting to see what the maths difference is between a flat 3 HD humanoid and one under the effects of either rage or heroism (or similar).

Mr.Satan · Jul 1, 2012

I'm still interested in 3.5.
I'd also love to see the nosferatu...finally. :devil:

Upper_Krust · Jul 1, 2012

Howdy Mr.Satan!

Mr.Satan said:
I'm still interested in 3.5.

Okay, that's two interested in it.

I'd also love to see the nosferatu...finally.

You and the darn Nosferatu. Grrr.

You know if I had detailed them back in the 3.5 days they would have been nothing more than slightly more powerful (vanilla) vampires. Whereas now, for 4E, I have a whole caste system (supported by 7 stat-blocks), history, locale, individual characters and religion worked out for them.

Khisanth the Ancient · Jul 1, 2012

Also very interested!

3-HD base humanoids may be a bit too far from "base" 3.x, IMO.

Upper_Krust · Jul 2, 2012

Hi Khisanth matey!

Khisanth the Ancient said:
Also very interested!

Okay.

3-HD base humanoids may be a bit too far from "base" 3.x, IMO.

The question is whether two wrongs make a right? Do I stick with the flawed human Hit Dice of the official books or something I know to be more accurate and appropriate.

Alzrius · Jul 2, 2012

Upper_Krust said:
Hi all,

okay so the Vampire Bestiary is out for 4th Edition. But what about the proposed 3E/Pathfinder conversion?

Is anyone here (more) interested in such a book?

Now how is that not a silly question?

Having said that, time is something of a concern for me. Working a 9-to-5 job tends to leave me drained on weekdays, and the effort to cram errands/relaxation/pet projects into the weekends means that the things I want to do often get bumped by the things I have to do.

In other words, I'd love to do this, but wonder how much I'd really be able to dig into it.

Upper_Krust said:
Its been a while since I cracked open a 3E book in earnest. So while I think I could easily convert over the main stat-blocks, I suspect I may be all at sea when I get to spell-like abilities and class levels...not to mention any Pathfinder changes over from 3E.

I want to mention that I strongly recommend using Pathfinder and simply abandoning 3.5 altogether. While the latter certainly has its holdouts, Pathfinder is now the dominant market for 3.X players. Having a 3.5 version, even as an additional option, seems pointless at best, since I find it doubtful it'd be worth the effort necessary for a strict 3.5 conversion.

Upper_Krust said:
Plus I have also been thinking whether the basic Cannibal should be base 3 HD (as per my monster design rules from the Epic Bestiary). In my opinion they should, even if other humans are (wrongly IMO) base 1 HD.

I think you need to tread very carefully here, U_K. When you start changing the base system, you invoke the wrath of its fans.

Slightly more seriously, changing something that's normally not changed, such as racial Hit Dice for humans, is likely to be seen as a bug, not a feature. While it's certainly possible for "monsters" to have advanced natural Hit Dice, that's not something that's easily accepted for humans (particularly as a function of lifestyle/environment, rather than out-andout mutation), particularly when you could use class levels to much the same effect.

Even if you write a "behind the curtain"-style sidebar, it's more likely to elicit head-scratching than approval.

There is one caveat here. While I haven't yet read it in full, the Advanced Race Guide just came out, and it includes a "race builder" section, which presumably deals with advanced natural Hit Dice. If you perhaps included a section about cannibal stats using those rules (though it'd still necessitate saying that (these) cannibals are different enough from "normal" people that they're essentially some sort of mutation/subspecies), then it might be seen as a feature and not a bug.

Upper_Krust said:
Added to which there is the whole Minion/Standard/Elite/Solo conversion rate.

Minion 3 could be CR 1/6th I suppose.
Elite 3 could be CR 7
Solo 4 could be CR 13
Solo 11 could be CR 20

Taking flat conversion rates where 1 Level = 1 CR.

This seems to fly in the face of your previous conversion chart, particularly since I seem to recall you mentioning that the reason the chart doesn't go down to level/CR/ECL 1 is that at some point the power difference is so small that it essentially becomes a 1:1 conversion.

Having said that, I wonder how much this should be tied to the mathematical conversion in any case. If certain monsters are meant for a 4th-level party, for instance, why not design their Pathfinder incarnation to be (at least around) CR 4?

Upper_Krust · Jul 2, 2012

Hi Alzrius mate!

Alzrius said:
Now how is that not a silly question?

Poignant though, because I am trying to gauge if there is enough desire to warrant the effort (its not exactly as if time has ever been on my side).

Having said that, time is something of a concern for me. Working a 9-to-5 job tends to leave me drained on weekdays, and the effort to cram errands/relaxation/pet projects into the weekends means that the things I want to do often get bumped by the things I have to do.

In other words, I'd love to do this, but wonder how much I'd really be able to dig into it.

The more I think about it, the more I see myself having to do the bulk of the groundwork on this anyway.

I want to mention that I strongly recommend using Pathfinder and simply abandoning 3.5 altogether. While the latter certainly has its holdouts, Pathfinder is now the dominant market for 3.X players. Having a 3.5 version, even as an additional option, seems pointless at best, since I find it doubtful it'd be worth the effort necessary for a strict 3.5 conversion.

I'm not totally sure what the difference is, but I could look through the Pathfinder Bestiary 2 and make stats comparable I imagine.

I think you need to tread very carefully here, U_K. When you start changing the base system, you invoke the wrath of its fans.

That's true. but if the fans knew everything about cannibals then they wouldn't need me to make a book about em'.

Slightly more seriously, changing something that's normally not changed, such as racial Hit Dice for humans, is likely to be seen as a bug, not a feature. While it's certainly possible for "monsters" to have advanced natural Hit Dice, that's not something that's easily accepted for humans (particularly as a function of lifestyle/environment, rather than out-andout mutation), particularly when you could use class levels to much the same effect.

Even if you write a "behind the curtain"-style sidebar, it's more likely to elicit head-scratching than approval.

*Groans* You are probably right. But it does nothing to endear me to the project.

There is one caveat here. While I haven't yet read it in full, the Advanced Race Guide just came out, and it includes a "race builder" section, which presumably deals with advanced natural Hit Dice. If you perhaps included a section about cannibal stats using those rules (though it'd still necessitate saying that (these) cannibals are different enough from "normal" people that they're essentially some sort of mutation/subspecies), then it might be seen as a feature and not a bug.

What if the cannibals were a sub-human species like Neanderthals?

This seems to fly in the face of your previous conversion chart, particularly since I seem to recall you mentioning that the reason the chart doesn't go down to level/CR/ECL 1 is that at some point the power difference is so small that it essentially becomes a 1:1 conversion.

That shows how far 3E is from my mind. Yes I should have converted them to ECL then dropped them 2/3rds to CR.

The Dire Crocodile ECL 13 becomes CR 8

Having said that, I wonder how much this should be tied to the mathematical conversion in any case. If certain monsters are meant for a 4th-level party, for instance, why not design their Pathfinder incarnation to be (at least around) CR 4?

Probably because that system doesn't differentiate between minions, standard monsters, elites and solos. A solo 4 is meant to be a greater threat than a minion 4.