D&D 3E/3.5 Going back to 3.5

[wlmartin]

For the past 2 years, I have played and DM'ed in 4.0, mainly because there was little demand or a hard time filling a group for 3.5. I unfortunately after spending a good deal of time trying to make 4.0 work for, as a DM i simply prefer 3.5 for a number of reasons.

I am running a one-shot adventure for my group with level 6 characters to playtest the mechanics and hopefuly win them over to a full switch of our regular weekly game.

So, with the preface out of the way, I would appreciate any advise, thoughts, suggestions, comments on the best mindset and practices to migrate a campaign to 3.5.

- The group are 7 players (yes i know, its a lot) with a Barbarian, Paladin, Sorceror, Warlock, Ranger, Shaman, Seeker
I am sure that I can respec all of these, not sure on the Seeker though (does it exist in 3.5 without homebrew?)
- The group consist of Dragonborn, Owlbear (don't ask!!), Human, Half-Orc, Tiefling x 2, Half-Elf
I am sure that I can fudge the Owlbear since he is just using normal humanoid stat block, the Tieflings and Dragonborn are another question.
I can always reskin a blank race (ie human without feats/skills bonus), a ability modifier and some kind of resist fire but am unsure how to do this and am reluctant to just throw in a level-adjusted tiefling
- The campaign world is homebrew, so modifing this to fit 3.5 should be swift and simple
- The adventures are homebrew, so modifing or creating new ones will be a different process for me but ultimately requiring no conversion of premade stuff
- Both myself and all my players have got access to the key corebooks to give us as much information as possible Any ideas guys? (thanks in advance)

 

[delericho]

-- Removed following edit of OP --

Just a suggestion, but you might want to edit this..

-- Removed following edit of OP --

- The group are 7 players (yes i know, its a lot) with a Barbarian, Paladin, Sorceror, Warlock, Ranger, Shaman, Seeker
I am sure that I can respec all of these, not sure on the Seeker though (does it exist in 3.5 without homebrew?)

Honestly, I'd be disinclined to convert, either way. My impression is that you'd get better results by wrapping up the campaign and then starting a new one in the new edition. But YMMV, of course.

I can't help out on the classes front, as I'm not familiar with the Seeker.

- The group consist of Dragonborn, Owlbear (don't ask!!), Human, Half-Orc, Tiefling x 2, Half-Elf
I am sure that I can fudge the Owlbear since he is just using normal humanoid stat block, the Tieflings and Dragonborn are another question.
I can always reskin a blank race (ie human without feats/skills bonus), a ability modifier and some kind of resist fire but am unsure how to do this and am reluctant to just throw in a level-adjusted tiefling

It shouldn't be too difficult to homebrew 4e-style Tieflings and Dragonborn into 3.5e. Just switch over to the standard +2/-2 ability mods arrangement, give a couple of skill modifiers, low-light or darkvision, and one 'power' of some description. One of the things I liked about 4e was that the races were generally pretty straightforward, and that also has the advantage of making them easy to convert.

 

[wlmartin]

Just a suggestion, but you might want to edit this. For "not a 4.0 bashing thread", you seem to do a pretty good job of bashing the edition, what with "dumbed down", and "more like MMOs".

The reason i was asking this not to be a bashing thread is that my view of the edition is not something I am looking to be taken into consideration in the "edition wars" argument, just wanted to provide that as context. Any posts commenting on this or arguing either case are trolling the actual purpose of the thread.


I am not saying my post isn't a possible argument waiting to happen and agree that I can't moderate reactions to such posts but am asking that no-one take that seriously for the purpose of making an argument as I do not want to enter into one.

Honestly, I'd be disinclined to convert, either way. My impression is that you'd get better results by wrapping up the campaign and then starting a new one in the new edition. But YMMV, of course.

I understand, I think the group are very involved in the story which is the big reason for the need to move

It shouldn't be too difficult to homebrew 4e-style Tieflings and Dragonborn into 3.5e. Just switch over to the standard +2/-2 ability mods arrangement, give a couple of skill modifiers, low-light or darkvision, and one 'power' of some description. One of the things I liked about 4e was that the races were generally pretty straightforward, and that also has the advantage of making them easy to convert.

Yeah, could find a way to make these work like that I suppose

 

[delericho]

The reason i was asking this not to be a bashing thread is that my view of the edition is not something I am looking to be taken into consideration in the "edition wars" argument, just wanted to provide that as context. Any posts commenting on this or arguing either case are trolling the actual purpose of the thread.

I am not saying my post isn't a possible argument waiting to happen and agree that I can't moderate reactions to such posts but am asking that no-one take that seriously for the purpose of making an argument as I do not want to enter into one.

My point was that you could just as easily have said "we decided 4e wasn't for us." There was no need for you to bash the edition, especially after claiming that that wasn't what you wanted the thread to be about.

Yeah, could find a way to make these work like that I suppose

One thing that occurs to me: have you looked at "Races of the Dragon"? I believe that introduced some sort of Dragonborn to 3.5e, although they're not quite the same as the 4e version (I think they were "Dragonborn of Bahamut", or somesuch thing).

 

[wlmartin]

My point was that you could just as easily have said "we decided 4e wasn't for us." There was no need for you to bash the edition, especially after claiming that that wasn't what you wanted the thread to be about.



One thing that occurs to me: have you looked at "Races of the Dragon"? I believe that introduced some sort of Dragonborn to 3.5e, although they're not quite the same as the 4e version (I think they were "Dragonborn of Bahamut", or somesuch thing).

Good point, edited out now... realize now there was no purpose to put that in as it didnt require it for my request.

Will checkout the Races of the Dragon as well

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Shaman might not need much work to port over. In looking through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_class_(Dungeons_&_Dragons) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaman_(Dungeons_&_Dragons) it seems you could go with the Shugenja or Spirit Shaman classes from Complete Divine. Do keep in mind a well-played sorcerer and spirit shaman (mostly down to spell selection) could likely outpace the barbarian, paladin, and ranger unless the latter are optimized better than usual. The warlock might also feel a bit out of place depending on how (s)he plays. Also note that the warlock in 3.5 doesn't have any binding or real cursing abilities like in 4.0. Binding in 3.5 is done with the Binder from Tome of Magic and the curses and such were originally done with the Hexblade in Complete Warrior.

Seeker might not have a counterpart in 3.5.

Dragonborn in Races of the Dragon is basically a template that grants +2 Con, -2 Dex, the Dragonblood subtype, +2 dodge bonus to AC against dragon types, immunity to frightful presence, and a draconic aspect that's either a breath weapon, wings and eventually flight, or better senses and immunity to paralysis and sleep effects.

Tieflings have an option to become +0 LA by simply making them the Humanoid type instead of Outsider. The rule is found in Player's Guide to Faerun, page 191. You could also use the savage progression version if you want something not so setting specific.

There's also level adjustment buyback from Unearthed Arcana (or the SRD) if you don't want the LA. Or you could just let it be and not bother with the LA because the abilities given to it are only barely enough to make it +1 LA.

 

[Greenfield]

My own view is that D&D 3.* and D&D 4 are different games, separate and distinct from each other. They share some common elements, but then so do D&D 3.* and Mutants and Masterminds.

That's not a criticism, just an observation. But to me it says that conversions, be they characters or scenarios, should only be attempted on a conceptual level. Preserve the name, flavor and personality, but don't even try to convert the mechanics. I doesn't really work.

I'm not telling you to quit your game, by the way, just keep your expectations under control.

 

[MoonSong]

Don't listen to people wanting to discourage you, conversion can be done, a lot of stuff from 3.x didn't make it to 4e, but in exchange, few from 4e wasn't already on 3.5.

On races:

Like they said Dragonborn can be found on Races of the dragon, and you can have Tieflings as either ther standard selves (under planetouched) or as lesser Tieflings (from Player Guide to Faerun), The owlbear, you can advance it using the monster classes from Savage Species (while it says you shouldn't I've seen monster classes multiclassing with normal classes before finishing the class without causing any problems) the rest have no big deal.

On classes:

Depending on your barbarian's build you may want to give the player a level or two of wilder to represent some of the primal powers, the shaman can work as either a druid or a spirit shaman, don't be affraid of the sorcerer, at sixth level he/she will be barely getting on his/her feet, but make sure to show that player the sweet utility magic that his/her character couldn't have on 4e (also check the luck feats from complete scoundrel -if wild magic-, the draconic bloodline from complete dragon -if dragon magic is really important- ). Check the UA paladin variants, chances are youur paladin could be a paladin of freedom. Your warlock may be very easy to convert, just check you indeed need a warlock(complete arcane), an hexblade (complete warrior)or binder (tome of magic) . Check if your ranger wants to cast spells because if that isn't the case, a non-spellcasting ranger (complete warrior) or a scout could do better.

The seeker is the hardest one, though a scout (complete adventurer) could work if your player downplays the spiritual part and focusses in using axes/bows and the mobility.