Converting Oriental Adventures creatures

[Cleon]

That all sounds good to me!

I'll agree to dropping the taboo SQ.

Updating Screaming Child Working Draft.

I guess it's time to work out the rattle. I'd say the base function is as a mace with an ability to make bull rush attacks, which I'd treat like a trip weapon, I think. But it also looks like it converts into something like a flail with an extended reach, or it can produce something like the flare spell. Sound about right?

30 feet reach seemed a bit more than extended melee reach to me, so I interpret it as an auto-return thrown weapon.

You know, this could be a minor magical rod rather than a standard weapon. Like a cheaper version of the rod of lordly might.

Anyway, statwise I'm thinking of something like:

Rattle: The Screaming Child wield an oversized brightly-painted rattle with a large ball for a head. Rather than a wooden toy, this rattle is a made from metal and is a rod-like magic item with three functions its wielder can switch between as a free action, simply by desiring it. The functions are as follows:

• Ball: The wielder can remove the rattle's head and hurl it as a thrown weapon with a 30 foot range and no range increment. The ball remains attached to the rattle by a 30-foot long chain and can instantly snap back to the haft when the wielder wishes, allowing them to make iterative thrown attacks with the ball. In other respects, the ball is a ranged weapon equivalent to a +1 light hammer.
• Mace: The rattle head becomes heavy and flanged, becoming a weapon equivalent to a +1 light mace. [plus "hurl?"]
• Flash: As a standard action, the wielder can point the rattle at a creature within X feet and create a burst of light in front of them. The wielder must succeed at a DC 18 Fortitude save or be blinded for 1d4 rounds. The save DC is Charisma-based.

Notes
#1: Weapon Enhancement
The +1 magic bonus is a placeholder, I was thinking +2 or even +3 would work better for a solo monster.

Especially as the Child has a negative strength modifier, the Child needs a +2 weapon just to match the 2-5 and 2-7 damage of the original stats!

#2: Hurl
Your proposal of the Bull Rush would require the Child to move with the opponent they're pushing, which doesn't match a "Hurl". I guess we could repurpose the Shadow Walker's hurl ability?

Hurl (Ex): The Shadow Walker can hurl an opponent to the ground with a successful grapple check. The target takes 2d6+4 damage and ends up prone on the ground in a 5 ft. square adjacent to the Shadow Walker, but is no longer being grappled. If the Shadow Walker loses the opposed grapple check, it can’t maintain the grapple and must immediately let go of the target. The Shadow Walker can Grab an opponent with a successful melee attack and then immediately attempt to Hurl the target with an opposed grapple check.​

So something like: "In addition, if the wielder hits an opponent with the rattle they can attempt to hurl them to the ground. The wielder must beat the target with an opposed grapple check with a +4 bonus to the wielder's grapple check. If successful, the target ends up prone on the ground in a 5 ft. square adjacent to the wielder. If unsuccessful, nothing happens (the wielder and his opponent are not considered to be grappled)."

[i[#3 Flash[/i]
The original 10 foot range seems too miserly. The spells flare and power word:blind are Close and blindness is Medium, so I'm inclined to make "X" 100 feet to put the range on the Medium scale.

 

[freyar]

I like the general outline you have. Let's go with +3, I guess. The Shadow Walker has a +2 weapon, and the Child is higher HD and needs something to be a bit stronger.

We could use the Shadow Walker's Hurl or borrow from the Snatch feat. They're pretty similar. So I guess I can go along with your proposed text (the stuff in quotation marks).

Flash looks good, but I think I'd go with something more like Close range than Medium just because it's clearly meant not to work too far away. So maybe 50 ft? That's close range with SL 10.

 

[Cleon]

I like the general outline you have. Let's go with +3, I guess. The Shadow Walker has a +2 weapon, and the Child is higher HD and needs something to be a bit stronger.

We could use the Shadow Walker's Hurl or borrow from the Snatch feat. They're pretty similar. So I guess I can go along with your proposed text (the stuff in quotation marks).

Flash looks good, but I think I'd go with something more like Close range than Medium just because it's clearly meant not to work too far away. So maybe 50 ft? That's close range with SL 10.

Works for me. Upon reflection I'm inclined to change the instances of "Wielder" to "Paper Warrior" since it implies the weapon's special abilities may be usable by anyone, which wasn't the intent.

Updating Screaming Child Working Draft.

 

[Cleon]

While updating the Screaming Child Working Draft I realized there was a slight problem with the rattle as written:

• Flash: As a standard action, the wielder can point the rattle at a creature within X feet and create a burst of light in front of them. The wielder must succeed at a DC 18 Fortitude save or be blinded for 1d4 rounds. The save DC is Charisma-based.

The target ought to make the saving throw not the wielder!

It's rarely to a combatant's advantage to deliberately blind themselves during a fight.

 

[freyar]

Hahahaha, yes. Except I think their are some clerics of Tyr in the Forgotten Realms who blindfold themselves commonly.

There seems to be an extra carriage return in the rattle description, by the way.

For Rejuvenation: If "destroyed," the Screaming Child shrivels to nothing with a whimper, leaving behind its possessions. A small clothing pin shaped into a small sword-shaped charm pendant simultaneously appears concealed somewhere nearby. Finding this concealed item requires a DC 15 Search check or DC 25 Spot check.

 

[Cleon]

Hahahaha, yes. Except I think their are some clerics of Tyr in the Forgotten Realms who blindfold themselves commonly.

There seems to be an extra carriage return in the rattle description, by the way.

That's odd. Surely we would have noticed that earlier, and why would we put a carriage-return after the second word in the first place?

Easily fixed…

For Rejuvenation: If "destroyed," the Screaming Child shrivels to nothing with a whimper, leaving behind its possessions. A small clothing pin shaped into a small sword-shaped charm pendant simultaneously appears concealed somewhere nearby. Finding this concealed item requires a DC 15 Search check or DC 25 Spot check.

Originally it was only the Shadow Warrior that concealed its sword charm, although we added the "need to find the thing" Search and Spot DC to the Paper Warrior's charm too I don't thing we should do so with the Screaming Child. It doesn't appear the subtle type.

Also, there's two uses of "small" in the second sentence describing the charm. One of them seems superfluous.

How about one of the following:

Rejuvenation (Ex) #1: The Screaming Child cannot be destroyed through simple combat. If "destroyed" its body and equipment shrivels to nothing with a whimper, leaving behind a few rags of clothing and a threadbare pouch containing a small sword-shaped charm pin.

Rejuvenation (Ex) #2: The Screaming Child cannot be destroyed through simple combat. If "destroyed" its body and equipment shrivels to nothing with a whimper, leaving a rotting embroidered pouch that contains a small sword-shaped charm pin.

Rejuvenation (Ex) #3: The Screaming Child cannot be destroyed through simple combat. If "destroyed" its body and equipment shrivels to nothing with a whimper. The few threadbare rags of clothing that remain include a rotting embroidered pouch that holds a small sword-shaped charm pin.

The following night, the Screaming Child reappears at full strength at whatever place it haunted and the sword charm vanishes. The Child can only be destroyed permanently if its sword charm is destroyed before it rejuvenates. A typical sword charm is a Fine sized object with 20 hp, hardness 12, and break DC 24.​

Not sure which of the descriptions I like the best. I'm split between #2 and #3.

 

[Tonguez]

By the way, I'm a bit skeptical of the provenance of this creature, from what I can find out a Chinese "Celestial Stag" is either a Kirin or Dragon, or a creature very similar to one, rather than resembling the creature described.

Since Borges The Book of Imaginary Beings included many purely fictional creatures (like the Cheshire Cat), many obscure creatures and at least one (the Peryton) which I can't find any mention of from an earlier source, the mine-dwelling version of the Celestial Stag may well be a "made up from scratch" or a local talltale, rather than a true mythical beast.

That doesn't mean we can't convert it though, it does make a cool monster.

The author responsible for coining this name (probably as a mistranslation of the original Chinese) was Dutch Sinological historian Jan J.M. de Groot (1854-1921), who wrote about it as follows in his six-volume treatise The Religious System of China (1892-1910):

"

Celestial roes are not men, but belong to the class of kiang si or corpse-demons…Yunnan province has many mines from which five kinds of metal are extracted. If they collapse, preventing the miners from getting out, then, if these men are fed for ten years or even for a hundred by the breath of the earth and of those metals, their bodies do not decay. Though they are not dead, their material substance is dead.

"It being underground perpetual night for those who work those mines, these men mostly carry a lamp on their forehead. When, while working their way into the ground, they fall in with a celestial roe, this is entranced with joy. Complaining of cold, it asks them for some tobacco, which it smokes immediately; then it prostrates itself upon the ground, entreating the men to take it out of the mine. In reply the miners say: 'We have come here for gold and silver, and we have not yet discovered any veins from which to procure some; do you know where the gold grows?' And the celestial stag guides them to a mine where they can reap a rich harvest. But on leaving the mine, they delude the spectre, saying: 'We must get out first, and then we shall take you out of the shaft with the lift'. And by the rope fastened to the bamboo lift they haul the creature up, but halfway they cut the rope, letting it fall down and die.

"It has occurred that the men in charge of the mine-sheds were more benevolent and compassionate, and hauled up some seven or eight of those beings. But as soon as these felt the wind, their clothes, flesh and bones changed into a liquid giving out a rancid, putrid stench, which smote with contagious disease all those whose olfactory nerves it affected, so that they died.

"This is the reason why, ever since, those who haul up celestial stags cut the rope, lest they have to endure again that stench and lose their lives. Should they refuse to haul them up, they risk being molested by them incessantly. It is also said, that when a small number of celestial stags are overpowered by a great number of men, tied, placed against an earthen wall, and immured firmly on the four sides with walls of clay, a sort of terrace with a lamp being built overhead, they will do no further harm. But if men are outnumbered by stags, they are tormented to death by these, and not allowed to escape.

"
."

 

[Cleon]

The author responsible for coining this name (probably as a mistranslation of the original Chinese) was Dutch Sinological historian Jan J.M. de Groot (1854-1921), who wrote about it as follows in his six-volume treatise The Religious System of China (1892-1910):

""
."

Thanks for the information, it sounds like we're dealing with a mistransalation of a mistransalation of a mistransalation that led to what was originally a variant Jiangshi becoming a D&D monster that's a slimy green deer-amoeba.

We could stat up an version that's truer to the original source material. i.e. an Undead ex-miner.

Is anyone game for that?

 

[freyar]

Could be up for that, just have to catch up on the other stuff!

Back to the Screaming Child. I'll go for Rejuvenation #3 above.

AC looks like 15 right now. That feels a bit low, but I'm not sure what to add. A profane bonus? What's that SQ, unholy ... that does that (and why can't I remember)?

 

[Cleon]

Could be up for that, just have to catch up on the other stuff!

Well I could always whip it up as a Cleon Special. Maybe do it as a reworking of the official 3E Oriental Adventures' Hopping Vampire?

Back to the Screaming Child. I'll go for Rejuvenation #3 above.

Updating Screaming Child Working Draft.

AC looks like 15 right now. That feels a bit low, but I'm not sure what to add. A profane bonus? What's that SQ, unholy ... that does that (and why can't I remember)?

Yes, AC 15 does seem too low for the Child to be soloing a party with its rattle. Although it's worth remembering the original creature had the worst AC of any of the Seven Swords - "AC 10 (+1)" - of which the +1 is the Dex bonus to AC an AD&D character with Dexterity 15 can claim, meaning its effectively AC 9 and should probably have been written that way.

Of course, if the child is sensible it will stay out of melee and hurl magic like most spellcasters so we could just leave it as it is.

Whatever we do, I think we'd better keep the AC the lowest of the Swords to have some sort of consistency.

So far we have:

The Reaper (AC 2 originally): AC 21 (+4 Dex, +2 insight, +5 natural), touch 16, flat-footed 17
The Veiled Maidens (AC 8 originally): AC 18 (+4 Dex, +4 deflection), touch 18, flat-footed 14
The General (AC 2 originally): AC 20 (+3 Dex, +7 +2 mithral breastplate), touch 13, flat-footed 17
The Shadow Warrior (AC 0 originally): AC 20 or 21* (+3 Dex, +2 Wis, +1 intrinsic, bracers of armor +2, + 2 dodge, +1* shield), touch 18, flat-footed 15 or 16* [* when using Two-Weapon Defense]
The Paper Warrior (AC 5 originally): AC 17 (+3 Dex, +4 monk bonus), touch 17, flat-footed 14
The Screaming Child (AC 9 originally): AC ? (+2 Dex, +3 dodge, +? bonus), touch 1?, flat-footed 1?
The Keeper (AC 3 originally): AC ?? (+? Dex, +? bonus, +? bonus), touch ??, flat-footed ??

Hmm… if we want to honor the original ACs sequence of the Sword it goes:

Lowest - Screaming Child
Poor - The Veiled Maidens
Low-Middle - The Paper Warrior
High-Middle - The Keeper
High - The General & The Shadow Warrior
Highest - The Shadow Warrior

Which means that the Paper Warrior should not have a lower AC than the Veiled Maidens and the Shadow Warrior's AC should be higher than all the others.

Might want to tweak some of their ACs up a bit to space them out better. There's currently only a 1-point AC gap between the AC 18 Maidens and AC 20 General and a 2-point gap with the AC 21 Reaper, while the original had a 6-point gap between those two pairs.

That doesn't leave room for the Paper Warrior and Keeper to have ACs between the Reaper/General and Maidens AND be different from each other.

How about we amend it by adding or increasing some natural armor bonuses like so:

The Reaper #2 (AC 2 originally): AC 22 (+4 Dex, +2 insight, +6 natural), touch 16, flat-footed 18
The Veiled Maidens #2 (AC 8 originally): AC 18 (+4 Dex, +4 deflection), touch 18, flat-footed 14
The General #2 (AC 2 originally): AC 22 (+3 Dex, +7 +2 mithral breastplate, +2 natural), touch 13, flat-footed 19
The Shadow Warrior #2 (AC 0 originally): AC 23 or 24* (+3 Dex, +2 Wis, +1 intrinsic, bracers of armor +2, + 2 dodge, +1* shield, +3 natural), touch 18, flat-footed 18 or 19* [*when using Two-Weapon Defense]
The Paper Warrior #2 (AC 5 originally): AC 19 (+3 Dex, +4 monk bonus, +2 natural) , touch 17, flat-footed 16
The Screaming Child #2 (AC 10 originally): AC 17? (+2 Dex, +3 dodge, +2 natural), touch 15, flat-footed 12
The Keeper #2 (AC 3 originally): AC 21 (+? Dex, +? bonus, +? bonus), touch ??, flat-footed ??

Obviously it's not a precise match to the original creature's ACs but I think it honours the original progressions better.

Actually, I'd be more in favour of tweaking the Child's Dex up to a +3 bonus and dropping the NA bonus since it means the undead will have the "naked" AC of 10 when flat-footed and be 2-points lower than the Maidens like in the original. If you prefer AC 17 I'd be willing to make the Dex bonus +4. We did give the Veiled Maidens a Dex of 19 rather than the original's 15 after all.

The Screaming Child #3 (AC 10 originally): AC 16 (+3 Dex, +3 dodge), touch 16, flat-footed 10