Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sixten" data-source="post: 241580" data-attributes="member: 5641">As sort of a learning exercise for the 3E rules (which I've picked up after a long hiatus from D&D), I've been working on converting an old module: X4, Master of the Desert Nomads. There are a number of "new" creatures in it, and I wanted to get some feedback on my conversions (accuracy, adherance to the rules), as well as ask a couple of questions about the process.The creatures from this module are: bhut, juggernaut, nagpa, tabi, and soul eater. My conversions are in the attached RTF file, and below are some notes about what I've done, and where I've run into trouble. Any advice or guidance you all can provide would be appreciated.Bhut: I feel pretty good about this conversion, which is similar to, but not the same as, one available from the old conversion archive by Robert Schwalb.Juggernaut: the CC has a 3E juggernaut, but that conversion is based (I think) on a creature from an 1E module, which was already different from the creature in X4. The biggest question I have here is the damage it does. The X4 version does 8d10/10d10 and the CC creature does 4d6+13; the monster-building article lists huge construct damage as typically about 2d8. Granted, having a stone house rolling over a PC seems like it should do some damage <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> but I'm not sure where the appropriate balance between literal conversion and 3E-ness lies.Nagpa: this creature was one of the harder ones for me. Not because of the basic stats, but because the primary ability of the nagpa is to throw a bunch of spells. The fluff strongly implies to me that the 3E version should be able to take wizard levels. And if nagpa are wizards, should I reduce the base HD, etc., and assume that the OD&D stats are for a nagpa that has wizard levels already? Should they keep their innate spells?Tabi: my biggest question here is one of size. The tabi is described as being the size of a "large housecat." Actually, now that I review everything, I'm not sure why I made mine Small and not Tiny, except maybe that the attack damages worked out better. Oh, well, back to work fixing that one.... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> Soul Eater: here, too, there is a conversion in the CC (which I discovered only the other day), and we seem to have gone very different ways with our conversions. If you read this, Scott, I'd be especially grateful for your thoughts. The biggest difference is that I've made mine incorporeal: this seemed to be faithful to the spirit of the original creature, and in keeping with a number of its special abilities. I am a little worried about whether that makes it too strong, though. This is part of the reason why my version does not kill directly by draining, but must coup de grace the helpless victim. Also, I see that the CC version has extrapolated as well, adding the Find Target abilities, and removing the extra HD and damage from the rage. Also, I see that the CR is 10; the guesstimator would say about 5 -- why so much higher?Thanks for any help you can offer,Sixten</blockquote>

Verification