Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IanB" data-source="post: 2849346" data-attributes="member: 1473">I agree with Werk here. The 2 scenarios (especially the 2nd) basically yank the rules out from under the players, without any context. Your first hint would probably have been enough for me, but the 2nd? Nothing in the 3E rules prepares you for a situation where the proper way to deal with what seems to be a construct is to use dispel magic. It was a pretty decent clue and might have been sufficient for some players, but I don't think that's where the mistake was made anyway.Typically when I am converting 2E or 1E content and I come across something like what you describe in one of these situations, I ignore or change the parts that don't mesh right with the way 3+E works. It is more important to end up with a playable encounter than an exact replica of the original (often annoyingly arbitrary) prior edition content.For the second example, I would have converted the creature to an appropriately-CRed swarm using the swarm rules. You keep the basic flavor of the encounter without adding extra weird mechanics that are inconsistent with the rules.In the end I would say that your mistake was at that point, not with the clues you were giving.</blockquote>