Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Converting a 1e character to 3e

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:12:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and am
trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's problematic because of an
18/00 strength and 19 Con, which started out as 18/97 and 18 before the +1
adjustments for half-orc back then (along with -2 Cha). So one way is to
convert her rolled stats as in the conversion guide, then add the new
adjustments. Her 18/97 becomes 22, which becomes 24 with the 3e stat mods for
half orcs.

post-gen rolled guide post-mod
Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
Int: 14 14 14 12
Wis: 8 8 8 8
Dex: 10 10 10 10
Con: 19 18 18 18
Cha: 6 8 8 6

This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest allowed
stat before racial mods. One obvious response is to chop the 24 back to 20,
but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the 1e.
Another is to extend the point buy system to allow 19-22 stats, then make sure
the other characters in the campaign start with equal points:

Point buy:
Start with all scores at 8. Raise a stat to 14 at 1pt/stat level, then 2 more
for 15 & 16 (each), then 3 more for 17 & 18. Then apply racial mods.
8 0 9 1 10 2 11 3 12 4 13 5 14 6 15 8 16 10
17 13 18 16
Extension: -1 pt/stat level below 8 (Bradd Szonye observes penalties often
linear while increases quadratic).
7 -1 6 -2 5 -3 4 -4 3 -5
Possible extension for higher values (2e exceptional strength).
+4 more 19/20, +5 more 21/22, +6 more 23
19 20 20 24 21 29 22 34 23 40

This means she costs 34+10+0+2+16+0=62. I observe that 62 points gives 6
stats at 10 points each, which means 16's across the board; the odd 2 points
aren't enough to take a 16 to a 17.

Has anyone ever tried to run with so many points? What's the highest point
buy you've ever used? Were the characters ultra powerful?

The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high powered
campaign" in the DMG.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

More about : converting character

Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:12:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca...

>I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and
>am
> trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's problematic because of
> an
> 18/00 strength and 19 Con, which started out as 18/97 and 18 before the +1
> adjustments for half-orc back then (along with -2 Cha). So one way is to
> convert her rolled stats as in the conversion guide, then add the new
> adjustments. Her 18/97 becomes 22, which becomes 24 with the 3e stat mods
> for
> half orcs.
>
> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
> Int: 14 14 14 12
> Wis: 8 8 8 8
> Dex: 10 10 10 10
> Con: 19 18 18 18
> Cha: 6 8 8 6
>
> This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest
> allowed
> stat before racial mods. One obvious response is to chop the 24 back to
> 20,
> but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the 1e.
> Another is to extend the point buy system to allow 19-22 stats, then make
> sure
> the other characters in the campaign start with equal points:



Why do people insist on 'converting' characters? Why not just make a NEW
character and forget all that conversion nonsense? I mean, really...





> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
> powered
> campaign" in the DMG.


Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.




> --
> "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
> http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long
> story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:12:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
>
> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to
> convert to 3e, and am trying to figure the best way of
> doing so. She's problematic because of an 18/00 strength
> and 19 Con,
<snip>

My recommendation: Rebuild her from scratch, with the same intent as
the original. If necessary, *make her weaker* than she was.

> This means she costs 34+10+0+2+16+0=62. I observe that 62
> points gives 6 stats at 10 points each, which means 16's
> across the board; the odd 2 points aren't enough to take a
> 16 to a 17.
>
> Has anyone ever tried to run with so many points?

No. If someone wants a character that powerful, I'd rather they play
a half-$foo for the stat mods.

> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?

All of my campaigns at present use 36 point-buy, and that's quite
high, as it makes straight 14's possible. This was intentional on my
part, as that's a pretty clear power breakpoint, if you take the point
values as any evidence.

> Were the characters ultra powerful?

They're definitely strong, but I have an advantage that none of us are
powergamers unless we're actively trying to be. For example, the
'classic' powergamer classes are almost never min/maxed, while the
'weak' classes (i.e. bard, monk) often are, to maintain balance.

Basically, we like over-the-top heroism. 36 point-buy gives us that.
More would be too much, IMO.

> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40
> points. Has anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher
> than the 32-point "high powered campaign" in the DMG.

While 40 is high even for my games, it's not *enough* too high that I
wouldn't object to a converted character like this as an NPC. For a
PC, I'd ask the other players their opinions, but wouldn't allow
balance 'compensation' to the other PCs, I'd just drop the character
to 36 points if anyone objected to the 40-point version.

--
Nik
- remove vermin from email address to reply.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:12:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I don't think you should necessarily use point-buy as a measure of
balance for the ability scores. Point buy is just an option. Not
every 3E games uses point buy. Even the PHB suggests 4d6, drop lowest,
arrange to taste. A 1st level character with ability scores 18, 18,
14, 10, 8, 8 before race modifiers is not out of whack.

If this is pure hypothetical speculation for a character conversion,
then point-buy comparison is moot. All that matters is how the
character, as is, needs to be adapted using 3E game mechanics.
However, as a matter of reference it is ok to note that it is not quite
compatible to point-buy characters, but that's only an observation not
a criticism. If you are going to use it as part of a campaign where
every characters is 1E-3E conversion, then point buy is still moot
because all the characters are being converted together. If you are
going to convert this character for a pre-existing 3E campaign that use
dice rolling, then point-buy is moot. Compare the scores to the rest
of the party, adjust only as necessary to be reasonbly compatible,
perhaps not at all. If the pre-existing 3E characters were created
with point-buy then of course you have a little dilemma. It would be
easier to start from scratch and develop your new 3E character to match
as closely as possible your 1E character. However, if your converting
a 1E character for a point-buy 3E campaign but at a significant level
higher than 1st, then perhaps point-buy comparison is almost moot. The
other characters are already of significant power your chracter's
ability scores wouldn't matter or you could easily start at one level
lower and not worry too much about it.

Gerald Katz
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:12:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Nikolas Landauer wrote:
> David Alex Lamb wrote:
>
>>I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to
>>convert to 3e, and am trying to figure the best way of
>>doing so. She's problematic because of an 18/00 strength
>>and 19 Con,
>
> <snip>
>
> My recommendation: Rebuild her from scratch, with the same intent as
> the original. If necessary, *make her weaker* than she was.

I'm working on converting a 2e campaign of my own. I've long ago
decided that starting from scratch would be the best way to go. With an
eye on maintaining character concept, of course.

I think this I came to this decision because one of my players noted
that certain ability scores have slightly different meanings between
editions. His complaint was specifically related to Dexterity. There
was no significant mechanical impact of an 8 Dexterity vs. a 10 Dex in
2e. But now the -1 vs. +0 mod indicates that the character is a little
klutzy. This went against the grain of his character concept, and
requested a chance to fix that in conversion.

So I'm looking at just starting from scratch. I think point buy will
prevent random die rolls from making the character too different from
the original concept.

Of course, I could trust my characters to adjust the stats as they
desire, too. :-) But I still want a way to monitor their relative
power levels.

-Tialan
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 5:36:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <pyD8e.7383$EX4.7025@fed1read01>,
Shawn Wilson <Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Why do people insist on 'converting' characters?

Because it's fun?
>> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
>> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
>> powered campaign" in the DMG.
>
>
>Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.

Thank you for not helping.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 5:46:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1113787287.9474f14516bb49eb0e4fc5b664f2b48f@teranews>,
Nikolas Landauer <dacileva.flea@hotmail.com.tick> wrote:
>David Alex Lamb wrote:
>> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?
>
>All of my campaigns at present use 36 point-buy, and that's quite
>high, as it makes straight 14's possible. This was intentional on my
>part, as that's a pretty clear power breakpoint, if you take the point
>values as any evidence.
>
>> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40
>> points. Has anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher
>> than the 32-point "high powered campaign" in the DMG.
>
>While 40 is high even for my games, it's not *enough* too high that I
>wouldn't object to a converted character like this as an NPC. For a
>PC, I'd ask the other players their opinions, but wouldn't allow
>balance 'compensation' to the other PCs, I'd just drop the character
>to 36 points if anyone objected to the 40-point version.

She was originally an NPC, rolled up to bolster the party, which was a bit
weak on fighters. When the DM got too busy to keep going, he took her as his
PC while my old character became an NPC.

For grins I'll try remaking her at 36 points.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 6:11:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <d3v3if$q9i$1@knot.queensu.ca>,
David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:
>In article <1113787287.9474f14516bb49eb0e4fc5b664f2b48f@teranews>,
>Nikolas Landauer <dacileva.flea@hotmail.com.tick> wrote:
>>David Alex Lamb wrote:
>>> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?
>>
>>All of my campaigns at present use 36 point-buy, and that's quite
>>high, as it makes straight 14's possible.
>For grins I'll try remaking her at 36 points.

The highest point buy mentioned so far on rgfd is 36. Sticking to DnD limits,
and keeping the priorities as Str>Con>Int>Dex this gives
Stat Pts race 20th level
Str 18 16 20 23
Con 16 10 16 18
Int 15 8 13 13
Dex 10 2 10 10
Wis 8 9 8 8
Cha 8 0 6 6
--
36

She gets back close to her original numbers by 20th level; 2 levels lower in
Con, and 1 lower in Int. Slightly better (minmaxed) is Str 22 and Int 14; I'd
take the Int first, at 4th level.

That just leaves me to figure out what to do about the Gladiator kit I
neglected to consider. I think I figured she'd need to be Ftr 5/Glad 1, so
6th level instead of 3rd, and there is little correspondence in the benefits
of the two.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 4:43:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca,
David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> typed:
> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to
> 3e, and am trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's
> problematic because of an 18/00 strength and 19 Con, which started
> out as 18/97 and 18 before the +1 adjustments for half-orc back then
> (along with -2 Cha).

One view on the matter: You have max strength, which in 3e means 18 + race.
You're converting the char into 3e rules, not trying to make the 3e rules
convert to the 1e char.

--
T. Koivula
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:20:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <vNI8e.10103$lP1.8201@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Michael Scott Brown <mistermichael@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
>news:D 3v2v0$pgk$1@knot.queensu.ca...
>> >> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points.
>Has
>> >> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
>> >> powered campaign" in the DMG.
>> >
>> >Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.
>>
>> Thank you for not helping.
>
> Quit your bitching, you sissy. The poster is exactly correct

I never said he wasn't correct, just that I didn't find his note to be
helpful. Many other posters, including you, went into detail on how to go
about it that I did find helpful, and I did post a 3e-legal 36-pointer last
night, which was the limit in one poster's game.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:33:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 18 Apr 2005 00:12:47 GMT, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb)
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and am
> trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's problematic because of an
> 18/00 strength and 19 Con, which started out as 18/97 and 18 before the +1
> adjustments for half-orc back then (along with -2 Cha). So one way is to
> convert her rolled stats as in the conversion guide, then add the new
> adjustments. Her 18/97 becomes 22, which becomes 24 with the 3e stat mods for
> half orcs.
>
> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
> Int: 14 14 14 12
> Wis: 8 8 8 8
> Dex: 10 10 10 10
> Con: 19 18 18 18
> Cha: 6 8 8 6
>
> This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest allowed
> stat before racial mods. One obvious response is to chop the 24 back to 20,
> but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the 1e.

IIRC 18/00 (which IIRC is illegally high for a female half-orc, and
possibly for a male one as well) gave +2 to hit and +6 to damage. This
is about the same as the +4/+4 Str 18 gives in 3e. Yes, I know that's
not how the conversion guide says to do things, but IME if you have
powerful 1e/2e characters converting by what the stats do, rather than
by what their values were gives much better results.

> Has anyone ever tried to run with so many points? What's the highest point
> buy you've ever used? Were the characters ultra powerful?

I've never neded up using a pure point-buy system, but I've had 3e
characters in the 40-60 point range after using rolled stats. I
recommend against it - they are indeed very powerful. In fact, they
distort quite a bit of the system because of it. Apparent 'normal'
encounters are very easy, but (at lower levels) ones that will test
their mettle result in more deaths than you'd expect (because they're
powerful, but lack HP). Using these more powerful encounters means
more XP and money, so their power amps up faster, and this feeds a
cycle...

IME, and by some basic calculations, every six points of actual stats
(not points in point-buy) is roughly a +1 LA in terms of power.
Overall those six points won't give the higher spell levels of a high
level, but they give better DCs for them, as well more HP, better BAB,
better AC, better saves, and much better skills. Just say no to high
point-value PCs.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:33:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <okd661t5simqtlvfrab8vuf573r2pda6o2@4ax.com>,
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>On 18 Apr 2005 00:12:47 GMT, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb)
>carved upon a tablet of ether:
>> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and am
>> trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's problematic because of an
>> 18/00 strength and 19 Con
>
>IIRC 18/00 (which IIRC is illegally high for a female half-orc, and
>possibly for a male one as well) gave +2 to hit and +6 to damage. This
>is about the same as the +4/+4 Str 18 gives in 3e.

Hmm. Did you do a "typical fight" calculation comparing the two, or was this
an educated guess? It says that 1e 18/00 really does map to 3e 18, and that
other 1e stats should be even lower.

>.. Just say no to high
>point-value PCs.

That seems to be the consensus. If you use point buy, what total do you
usually pick?
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:43:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and am
> trying to figure the best way of doing so.
<snip>
> So one way is to convert her rolled stats as in the conversion guide, then add
> the new adjustments. Her 18/97 becomes 22, which becomes 24 with the 3e stat
> mods for half orcs.

I'd ignore that part of the conversion guide, it's /really/ silly.

> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
> Dex: 10 10 10 10
> Con: 19 18 18 18
> Int: 14 14 14 12
> Wis: 8 8 8 8
> Cha: 6 8 8 6
>
> This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest allowed
> stat before racial mods. One obvious response is to chop the 24 back to 20,
> but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the 1e.

No it doesn't. 18/00 was +3 to hit and +6 to damage, a half-orc
with 20 Str has +5 to hit and (with two handed weapons) +7 to damage;
that's strictly _better_ than ADnD.
A 14 Str fighter is +2 to hit and +3 to damage better than ADnD,
and so are you, pretty much. The drop from +5 hit points to +4 isn't a
biggie either, especially if you grab Improved Toughness.

> Another is to extend the point buy system to allow 19-22 stats, then make sure
> the other characters in the campaign start with equal points:

Or give them some items that boost the stats, or feats that give
the effects of boosted stats, or taking classes (like Brb) that allow
increases in stats on a temporary or permanent basis.

Really, if you're happy with the old rolls, let new guys roll too;
if you want to use point, buy an approimation with 25 or 28 points, and
use the other tricks to boosts Str and Con as needed.
16/08/16/12/08/08 is 28 points [18/08/16/10/08/06 after mods].

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:43:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

tussock wrote:
> No it doesn't. 18/00 was +3 to hit and +6 to damage, a half-orc with
> 20 Str has +5 to hit and (with two handed weapons) +7 to damage; that's
> strictly _better_ than ADnD.
> A 14 Str fighter is +2 to hit and +3 to damage better than ADnD, and
> so are you, pretty much. The drop from +5 hit points to +4 isn't a
> biggie either, especially if you grab Improved Toughness.
>
>> Another is to extend the point buy system to allow 19-22 stats, then
>> make sure
>> the other characters in the campaign start with equal points:
>
>
> Or give them some items that boost the stats, or feats that give the
> effects of boosted stats, or taking classes (like Brb) that allow
> increases in stats on a temporary or permanent basis.
>
> Really, if you're happy with the old rolls, let new guys roll too;
> if you want to use point, buy an approimation with 25 or 28 points, and
> use the other tricks to boosts Str and Con as needed.
> 16/08/16/12/08/08 is 28 points [18/08/16/10/08/06 after mods].
>

Yeah. To the original poster, you need to consider the whole picture
before converting. 3E is much more than just 6 stats. There are skills
and feats and equipment to consider, as well as multiclassing. You have
to consider the combination of all those things. A typical character in
3E will get a half dozen extra stat points from low-end magic items.

I also agree with T. Koivula (next post in thread). You are trying to
force higher stats and bonuses. This character is already beyond the
legal stat limits (I think 1/2 orc was 18/99 str male and 18/95 or 18/50
for female). Don't try to use a conversion document. Think instead how
your character's stats compare to max, and then take the same
relationship in 3E. If the character has max str and con, then give the
character max str and con in 3E (20/20 for a 1/2 orc). If the character
has abilities between 3 and 18, then keep them the same. Only scores of
18/01 and up really need any conversion.

Alex
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:43:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <d40as0$t0h$1@news01.intel.com>,
Alex Johnson <compuwiz@psualum.com> wrote:
>... This character is already beyond the
>legal stat limits (I think 1/2 orc was 18/99 str male and 18/95 or 18/50
>for female).

Yes -- I'd forgotten that this campaign threw out stat limits for the various
races.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 9:26:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42633b14@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote:
>if you want to use point, buy an approimation with 25 or 28 points, and
>use the other tricks to boosts Str and Con as needed.
> 16/08/16/12/08/08 is 28 points [18/08/16/10/08/06 after mods].

Thanks. I may try that.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 9:28:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <d40as0$t0h$1@news01.intel.com>,
Alex Johnson <compuwiz@psualum.com> wrote:
>Yeah. To the original poster, you need to consider the whole picture
>before converting. 3E is much more than just 6 stats. There are skills
>and feats and equipment to consider, as well as multiclassing. You have
>to consider the combination of all those things. A typical character in
>3E will get a half dozen extra stat points from low-end magic items.

Yes, but not at low levels -- she was 3rd when the old campaign ended, and
standard GP at that level is 2700. There aren't any stat boosters that cheap.
Eventually, yes, she'll make use of appropriate stat boosters based on her
plans at the time.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 9:28:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> In article <d40as0$t0h$1@news01.intel.com>,
> Alex Johnson <compuwiz@psualum.com> wrote:
>
>>Yeah. To the original poster, you need to consider the whole picture
>>before converting. 3E is much more than just 6 stats. There are skills
>>and feats and equipment to consider, as well as multiclassing. You have
>>to consider the combination of all those things. A typical character in
>>3E will get a half dozen extra stat points from low-end magic items.
>
>
> Yes, but not at low levels -- she was 3rd when the old campaign ended, and
> standard GP at that level is 2700. There aren't any stat boosters that cheap.
> Eventually, yes, she'll make use of appropriate stat boosters based on her
> plans at the time.

If she was so low level then what's all the fuss about to make her
abilities comparable via stat points? She's going to be about 5x as
powerful and have tons of abilities she never had before from skills and
feats and extra modifiers in the ability score table. Why even pay
attention to stats when she won't even resemble the original character?

Most people don't bother converting such inconsequential characters. I
thought this was a major, long-term N/PC you really wanted to continue.
But it sounds, from her level, that she wasn't that important or long
lived. Just create a strong, sturdy half-orc fighter or barbarian and
have done with it. Conversion serves little purpose under these
circumstances.

Alex
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 10:57:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> "David Alex Lamb" wrote:
>> Shawn Wilson wrote:
>
<snip character>
>
>>> Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.
>
>> Thank you for not helping.
>
> Quit your bitching, you sissy. The poster is exactly correct
>
<snip>

A historic first: Michael Scott Brown just agreed with Shawn Wilson!

That's the signpost up ahead: Armageddon...


Arivne
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 11:34:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <d40sqa$6oh$1@news01.intel.com>,
Alex Johnson <compuwiz@psualum.com> wrote:
>Most people don't bother converting such inconsequential characters. I
>thought this was a major, long-term N/PC you really wanted to continue.

Do you equate consequentiality with being high-level? She had a strong
backstory; it seems now that my failing to post it was a major strategic
error.

> But it sounds, from her level, that she wasn't that important or long
>lived.

As I said before, she was a PBEM character. That means months of realtime,
and a high ration of thinking-about-character to playing-the-character.
The guy who played here did a really good job of working with the background
I'd originally created when she was an NPC. So she's memorable, even if low
level.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 1:53:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> IIRC 18/00 (which IIRC is illegally high for a female half-orc, and
> possibly for a male one as well) gave +2 to hit and +6 to damage.
This
> is about the same as the +4/+4 Str 18 gives in 3e. Yes, I know that's
> not how the conversion guide says to do things, but IME if you have
> powerful 1e/2e characters converting by what the stats do, rather
than
> by what their values were gives much better results.
>
> Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
> "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth
itself
> should be free."

Nitpick: 18/00 ST gave +3 to hit, +6 to damage. Still, it is
comparable to 3E 18 Strength, so go with that.

Gerald Katz
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 3:45:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In news:D 4124e$idn$1@knot.queensu.ca,
David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> typed:
> Do you equate consequentiality with being high-level? She had a
> strong backstory; it seems now that my failing to post it was a major
> strategic error.


What about the backstory is dependant on the stats staying exactly the same?
Meaning that if she's only 3rd level is there anything significant about her
that would be lost if you created her from ground up as a 3rd level 3e
character? Backstory, personality etc. are usually pretty independant of the
rulesedition. What about her actually demands conversion?

--
T. Koivula
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:16:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <d41696$3l2$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>,
T. Koivula <plistat@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What about the backstory is dependant on the stats staying exactly the same?

Nothing --- which I've realized after all the helpful postings in this thread,
but which I failed to think of at first.

>Meaning that if she's only 3rd level is there anything significant about her
>that would be lost if you created her from ground up as a 3rd level 3e
>character?

That's what I'm now doing.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 4:35:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 18 Apr 2005 16:25:46 GMT, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb)
carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Hmm. Did you do a "typical fight" calculation comparing the two, or was this
> an educated guess? It says that 1e 18/00 really does map to 3e 18, and that
> other 1e stats should be even lower.

Educated guess, based on what I've seen, and on the relationship of
damage and BAB that Power Attack uses.

> >.. Just say no to high
> >point-value PCs.
>
> That seems to be the consensus. If you use point buy, what total do you
> usually pick?

I've never managed to sell my group on point-buy, and they tend to
demand several columns of rolls, choosing the best. Next time I start
a campaign I'll be using 28 points. No discussion, and if they don't
like it someone else can GM.

One thing I do use is fixed hit points. I've been using them since
late 2e, and when I went to 3e I stopped for the first campaign I ran.
The result was a high-stat barbarian with obscene hit points because
the player never rolled less than an '8' for his HP, and averaged 10
HP/level from the die. I now use HP fixed at HD size/2+1 (IOW the
average roll, rounded up).

As you can see, over time I'm moving to remove random factors from
chargen and advancement. Maybe I should introduce fixed starting
wealth just to make a clean sweep.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 18 Apr 2005 18:57:49 -0700, arivne@cox.net carved upon a tablet of
ether:

> Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> > "David Alex Lamb" wrote:
> >> Shawn Wilson wrote:
> >
> <snip character>
> >
> >>> Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.
> >
> >> Thank you for not helping.
> >
> > Quit your bitching, you sissy. The poster is exactly correct
> >
> <snip>
>
> A historic first: Michael Scott Brown just agreed with Shawn Wilson!
>
> That's the signpost up ahead: Armageddon...

Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
"completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
right twice a day" as his defence.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:n8r86155av00j57nuqipp6dbngjlt0tv60@4ax.com...
> > A historic first: Michael Scott Brown just agreed with Shawn Wilson!
> >
> > That's the signpost up ahead: Armageddon...
>
> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
> right twice a day" as his defence.

The principle happens to be correct - in fact, it is the very reason
that assuming that a fool's argument will always be wrong is a fallacy.

-Michael
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Arivne wrote:
>> A historic first: Michael Scott Brown just agreed with Shawn Wilson!
>> That's the signpost up ahead: Armageddon...

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
> right twice a day" as his defence.

Also note that MSB didn't attribute the quotation to Shawn. Do you think
that was an accident, or was MSB deliberately trying to conceal
agreement with Shawn?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
>> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
>> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
>> right twice a day" as his defence.

Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> The principle happens to be correct - in fact, it is the very reason
> that assuming that a fool's argument will always be wrong is a
> fallacy.

So your blatant intellectual dishonesty has nothing to do with it?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd68u9u.hf8.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> >> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
> >> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
> >> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
> >> right twice a day" as his defence.
>
> Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> > The principle happens to be correct - in fact, it is the very reason
> > that assuming that a fool's argument will always be wrong is a
> > fallacy.
>
> So your blatant intellectual dishonesty has nothing to do with it?

Hmm. *My* intellectual dishonesty, He Who Cowers From Arguments?

-Michael
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 6:31:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Michael Scott Brown just
said...
> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd68u9u.hf8.bradd+news@szonye.com...
> > Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> > >> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
> > >> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
> > >> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
> > >> right twice a day" as his defence.
> >
> > Michael Scott Brown wrote:
> > > The principle happens to be correct - in fact, it is the very reason
> > > that assuming that a fool's argument will always be wrong is a
> > > fallacy.
> >
> > So your blatant intellectual dishonesty has nothing to do with it?
>
> Hmm. *My* intellectual dishonesty, He Who Cowers From Arguments?

Would you two get a room or something?
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 10:30:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
> Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Michael Scott Brown just
> said...
>> "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd68u9u.hf8.bradd+news@szonye.com...
>> > Rupert Boleyn wrote:
>> > >> Yep. Note that MSB, while accusing Bradd of being (at best) foolish
>> > >> for happening to agree (somewhat) with Jeff Goslin, is calling Shawn
>> > >> "completely correct". No doubt he'll be using "stopped clocks are
>> > >> right twice a day" as his defence.
>> >
>> > Michael Scott Brown wrote:
>> > > The principle happens to be correct - in fact, it is the very reason
>> > > that assuming that a fool's argument will always be wrong is a
>> > > fallacy.
>> >
>> > So your blatant intellectual dishonesty has nothing to do with it?
>>
>> Hmm. *My* intellectual dishonesty, He Who Cowers From Arguments?
>
> Would you two get a room or something?

Awwww!
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 12:15:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Michael Scott Brown said

>> So your blatant intellectual dishonesty has nothing to do with it?
>
> Hmm. *My* intellectual dishonesty, He Who Cowers From Arguments?

Hey go back and piss in your own threads children.

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 9:29:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Shawn Wilson" <Ikonoqlast@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p yD8e.7383$EX4.7025@fed1read01...

> Why do people insist on 'converting' characters? Why not just make a NEW
> character and forget all that conversion nonsense? I mean, really...

The answer to this should be obvious.

>> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
>> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
>> powered
>> campaign" in the DMG.

> Take that as a hint that he needs to be scaled back.

....unless, of course, you want him to be that high-powered.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 9:39:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca...
>I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and
>am
> trying to figure the best way of doing so.

Okay.

> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
> Int: 14 14 14 12
> Wis: 8 8 8 8
> Dex: 10 10 10 10
> Con: 19 18 18 18
> Cha: 6 8 8 6

I would go with the following, before increasing stats for character levels:

Str: 20
Int 12
Wis 8
Dex 10
Con 18
Cha 6

> This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest
> allowed
> stat before racial mods.

Agreed.

> One obvious response is to chop the 24 back to 20,
> but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the 1e.

That is fine. Raise Strength with your level-based raises.

> I observe that 62 points gives 6
> stats at 10 points each, which means 16's across the board; the odd 2
> points
> aren't enough to take a 16 to a 17.
>
> Has anyone ever tried to run with so many points?

Sure.

> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?

The system for our high-powered games is 90 stat points, divided among the 6
stats. Each 2 points by which a stat is dropped below 10 reduces this total
by 1 (i.e., if you have an 8 in a stat you only get 89 points).
Incidentally, this is right around the median used by most of the well-known
Forgotten Realms characters.

> Were the characters ultra powerful?

Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters, but
not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
though.

> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
> powered
> campaign" in the DMG.

The 32-point "high-powered" campaign is about as high-powered as American
"hot salsa" is hot.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 3:16:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to
3e, and am
> trying to figure the best way of doing so. She's problematic because
of an
> 18/00 strength and 19 Con, which started out as 18/97 and 18 before
the +1
> adjustments for half-orc back then (along with -2 Cha). So one way
is to
> convert her rolled stats as in the conversion guide, then add the new
> adjustments. Her 18/97 becomes 22, which becomes 24 with the 3e stat
mods for
> half orcs.
>
> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
> Int: 14 14 14 12
> Wis: 8 8 8 8
> Dex: 10 10 10 10
> Con: 19 18 18 18
> Cha: 6 8 8 6
>
> This is obviously not a legal 3e character, since 18 is the highest
allowed
> stat before racial mods. One obvious response is to chop the 24 back
to 20,
> but that means the 3e character is somewhat less powerful than the
1e.

Top heavy on STR, I'd agree. But when you look at how much more
powerful a high level 3E fighter is in comparison to their 1E
counterpart, it balances out. My question really is, what level is
this character you're trying to convert? If it's first level, why not
build it from scratch? Relative power between editions is kinda
irrelevant IMO.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 3:26:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> In article <d40sqa$6oh$1@news01.intel.com>,
> Alex Johnson <compuwiz@psualum.com> wrote:
> >Most people don't bother converting such inconsequential characters.
I
> >thought this was a major, long-term N/PC you really wanted to
continue.
>
> Do you equate consequentiality with being high-level? She had a
strong
> backstory; it seems now that my failing to post it was a major
strategic
> error.
>

Uh, I don't think conversion means much for the backstory. The
backstory should be independant of what system you're using.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 5:05:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:39:24 -0700, "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

>The system for our high-powered games is 90 stat points, divided among the 6
>stats. Each 2 points by which a stat is dropped below 10 reduces this total
>by 1 (i.e., if you have an 8 in a stat you only get 89 points).
>Incidentally, this is right around the median used by most of the well-known
>Forgotten Realms characters.

Interesting. I use a similar but less high-powered system (79 stat
points, with floors on each stat determined by rolling 3d6). Do you
allow buying stats above 18?

>
>> Were the characters ultra powerful?
>
>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters, but
>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>though.
>
>> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points. Has
>> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
>> powered
>> campaign" in the DMG.
>
>The 32-point "high-powered" campaign is about as high-powered as American
>"hot salsa" is hot.

My gripe with the official point buy system is that it charges such a
large premium for scores above 14. My immediate reaction seeing this
was "Bleah! I'm going with a straight 'stat point' system in my game."

But even without this, you're right: 32 points isn't all that high
powered. My own 79 stat point system produces characters in the 31-50
"point buy points" range, and that's for a game set a couple of
notches below the FR power level. (And also deliberately conservative
until I get a better idea of what the effects of ability-boosting
magic will be like in actual play.)


--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 10:47:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Erol K. Bayburt" <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:s23h61hf58mc4d545b4llf4fgfdcqt3q2d@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:39:24 -0700, "Malachias Invictus"
> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>The system for our high-powered games is 90 stat points, divided among the
>>6
>>stats. Each 2 points by which a stat is dropped below 10 reduces this
>>total
>>by 1 (i.e., if you have an 8 in a stat you only get 89 points).
>>Incidentally, this is right around the median used by most of the
>>well-known
>>Forgotten Realms characters.
>
> Interesting. I use a similar but less high-powered system (79 stat
> points, with floors on each stat determined by rolling 3d6). Do you
> allow buying stats above 18?

Nope.

>>> Were the characters ultra powerful?
>>
>>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters,
>>but
>>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>>though.
>>
>>> The 3e-legal version of the character costs 16+6+0+2+16+0=40 points.
>>> Has
>>> anyone run at *this* pb-total? It's 8 higher than the 32-point "high
>>> powered
>>> campaign" in the DMG.
>>
>>The 32-point "high-powered" campaign is about as high-powered as American
>>"hot salsa" is hot.
>
> My gripe with the official point buy system is that it charges such a
> large premium for scores above 14. My immediate reaction seeing this
> was "Bleah! I'm going with a straight 'stat point' system in my game."

Exactly. Another option would be a straight "bonus point" system, which
would have the same effect.

> But even without this, you're right: 32 points isn't all that high
> powered. My own 79 stat point system produces characters in the 31-50
> "point buy points" range, and that's for a game set a couple of
> notches below the FR power level. (And also deliberately conservative
> until I get a better idea of what the effects of ability-boosting
> magic will be like in actual play.)

Cool beans.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 10:56:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <M7-dnbwWI5Qm2vXfRVn-1g@comcast.com>,
Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
>news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca...
>>I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to 3e, and
>>am
>> trying to figure the best way of doing so.
>
>> post-gen rolled guide post-mod
>> Str: 18/00 18/97 22 24
>> Int: 14 14 14 12
>> Wis: 8 8 8 8
>> Dex: 10 10 10 10
>> Con: 19 18 18 18
>> Cha: 6 8 8 6
>
>I would go with the following, before increasing stats for character levels:
>
>Str: 20
>Int 12
>Wis 8
>Dex 10
>Con 18
>Cha 6

Thanks. I currently use a 28-point build, parially in response to the folks
who said or suggested that it was too munckin to go higher, but would prefer
the one you outlined. The fact that such a high-point character wasn't
excessive means that, as long as she remains an NPC, there shouldn't be a
serious problem. If I stick to the spirit of point buy, I'd have to let all
the other characters use the same point total if she became a PC.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 11:02:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1114150582.553915.30700@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
Chris Hayes <hayes1@fadmail.com> wrote:
>
>David Alex Lamb wrote:
>> I have an AD&D 1e half-orc fighter character I'd like to convert to
>3e, and am
>
>Top heavy on STR, I'd agree. But when you look at how much more
>powerful a high level 3E fighter is in comparison to their 1E
>counterpart, it balances out. My question really is, what level is
>this character you're trying to convert? If it's first level, why not
>build it from scratch? Relative power between editions is kinda
>irrelevant IMO.

Later in the thread I mentioned that I was going to take the "rebuild" option,
and that she was currently 3rd level, at which point some said why bother? In
any case the actual build I did was 28 points, and she came out with the same
general feel as the original -- similar fighting style, death on two legs for
orcs. I then extrapolated her to 20th level to see what that might be like.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 7:12:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:

>
>"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
>news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca...

>> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?
>
>The system for our high-powered games is 90 stat points, divided among the 6
>stats. Each 2 points by which a stat is dropped below 10 reduces this total
>by 1 (i.e., if you have an 8 in a stat you only get 89 points).
>Incidentally, this is right around the median used by most of the well-known
>Forgotten Realms characters.

This suggests 18-18-18-16-10-10, or 18-18-16-16-12-10 or the like.
That's +15 in modifiers. Yow.

>> Were the characters ultra powerful?
>
>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters, but
>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>though.

Sounds pretty heavy to me. Take a fighter. 25-pt elite would be
something like Str 15 Con 14 Dex 13 Wis 12 Int 10 Cha 8.
Your method would be Str 18 Con 18 Dex 18 Wis 16 Int 10 Cha 10.
This is +2 to hit (+3 with missiles), +2/+3 damage, +3 AC, +2
hp/level, +2/+3+/+2 saves. That's huge, and worth at least a level
(once you've got above about 3rd for the hp to catch up).

Given a greatsword and PA, by 2nd level that Str increase is worth +7
damage on its own.

--
Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim

D&D and Star Fleet Battles stuff on http://www.aaargh.org
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 4:52:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 15:12:43 +0100, Jim Davies
<jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Sounds pretty heavy to me. Take a fighter. 25-pt elite would be
> something like Str 15 Con 14 Dex 13 Wis 12 Int 10 Cha 8.
> Your method would be Str 18 Con 18 Dex 18 Wis 16 Int 10 Cha 10.
> This is +2 to hit (+3 with missiles), +2/+3 damage, +3 AC, +2
> hp/level, +2/+3+/+2 saves. That's huge, and worth at least a level
> (once you've got above about 3rd for the hp to catch up).
>
> Given a greatsword and PA, by 2nd level that Str increase is worth +7
> damage on its own.

Try it with a rogue, where you'd have a couple fo extra skills at full
levels, and about a +3 to all the ones you care about, as well as more
HP, higher initiative, better saves, better AC... It mounts up really
quickly. Also, having multiple high stats makes multiclassing,
including into multiple PrCs more attractive, and makes 'light'
fighters more effective compared to 'heavy' fighters (too much so,
IMO).


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 2:49:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jim Davies" <jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> wrote in message
news:o iik61d0hdr52ufr76ks2jok6o8lrbe1re@4ax.com...
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:
>
>>
>>"David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
>>news:D 3uu1v$htb$1@knot.queensu.ca...
>
>>> What's the highest point buy you've ever used?
>>
>>The system for our high-powered games is 90 stat points, divided among the
>>6
>>stats. Each 2 points by which a stat is dropped below 10 reduces this
>>total
>>by 1 (i.e., if you have an 8 in a stat you only get 89 points).
>>Incidentally, this is right around the median used by most of the
>>well-known
>>Forgotten Realms characters.
>
> This suggests 18-18-18-16-10-10, or 18-18-16-16-12-10 or the like.
> That's +15 in modifiers. Yow.
>
>>> Were the characters ultra powerful?
>>
>>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters,
>>but
>>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>>though.
>
> Sounds pretty heavy to me. Take a fighter. 25-pt elite would be
> something like Str 15 Con 14 Dex 13 Wis 12 Int 10 Cha 8.
> Your method would be Str 18 Con 18 Dex 18 Wis 16 Int 10 Cha 10.
> This is +2 to hit (+3 with missiles), +2/+3 damage, +3 AC, +2
> hp/level, +2/+3+/+2 saves. That's huge, and worth at least a level
> (once you've got above about 3rd for the hp to catch up).
>
> Given a greatsword and PA, by 2nd level that Str increase is worth +7
> damage on its own.

Agreed. However, all the enemies are similarly "powered up". For example,
they generally have close to maximum hit points, and "special" enemies get
the same stat array.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 2:50:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:01tq61l8a3vifado95sfe8rvgchpv2sa5a@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 15:12:43 +0100, Jim Davies
> <jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> Sounds pretty heavy to me. Take a fighter. 25-pt elite would be
>> something like Str 15 Con 14 Dex 13 Wis 12 Int 10 Cha 8.
>> Your method would be Str 18 Con 18 Dex 18 Wis 16 Int 10 Cha 10.
>> This is +2 to hit (+3 with missiles), +2/+3 damage, +3 AC, +2
>> hp/level, +2/+3+/+2 saves. That's huge, and worth at least a level
>> (once you've got above about 3rd for the hp to catch up).
>>
>> Given a greatsword and PA, by 2nd level that Str increase is worth +7
>> damage on its own.
>
> Try it with a rogue, where you'd have a couple fo extra skills at full
> levels, and about a +3 to all the ones you care about, as well as more
> HP, higher initiative, better saves, better AC... It mounts up really
> quickly. Also, having multiple high stats makes multiclassing,
> including into multiple PrCs more attractive, and makes 'light'
> fighters more effective compared to 'heavy' fighters (too much so,
> IMO).

We use the damage reduction option for armor (each point of armor reduces 1
point of real damage to subdual damage), so this is not necessarily so.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 11:08:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:

>"Jim Davies" <jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> wrote in message
>news:o iik61d0hdr52ufr76ks2jok6o8lrbe1re@4ax.com...
>> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:

>>>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters,
>>>but
>>>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>>>though.
>>
>> Sounds pretty heavy to me.

>Agreed. However, all the enemies are similarly "powered up". For example,
>they generally have close to maximum hit points, and "special" enemies get
>the same stat array.

So why not just have everything as per the RAW? You seem to be playing
a rather superhero game with a party of destinied ubermensch battling
ubermonsters against a background of normal people. Maybe that's what
you want, but it seems a bit strange.

--
Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim

D&D and Star Fleet Battles stuff on http://www.aaargh.org
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 11:08:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jim Davies" <jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> wrote in message
news:01d571d6m2qvq0gpkujptmftquaspf9vib@4ax.com...
> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:
>
>>"Jim Davies" <jim@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> wrote in message
>>news:o iik61d0hdr52ufr76ks2jok6o8lrbe1re@4ax.com...
>>> "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> typed:
>
>>>>Not really. They are a bit more powerful than more "normal" characters,
>>>>but
>>>>not tremendously so. It allows me to throw heftier challenges at them,
>>>>though.
>>>
>>> Sounds pretty heavy to me.
>
>>Agreed. However, all the enemies are similarly "powered up". For
>>example,
>>they generally have close to maximum hit points, and "special" enemies get
>>the same stat array.
>
> So why not just have everything as per the RAW?

In what way are we not playing the rules as written?

> You seem to be playing
> a rather superhero game with a party of destinied ubermensch battling
> ubermonsters against a background of normal people.

Powerful heroic characters fighting powerful foes and overcoming great
challenges, yes. That is exactly what we are playing.

> Maybe that's what you want, but it seems a bit strange.

Why is that, pray tell? If I wanted gritty fantasy, I would play GURPS. I
want cinematic heroism and larger than life heroes, with foes and challenges
to match. D&D is altogether suitable for this. Have you actually looked at
the iconic NPCs in the Forgotten Realms Handbook? They are similarly
powerful.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 10:22:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:13:35 -0700, "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Why is that, pray tell? If I wanted gritty fantasy, I would play GURPS. I
> want cinematic heroism and larger than life heroes, with foes and challenges
> to match. D&D is altogether suitable for this. Have you actually looked at
> the iconic NPCs in the Forgotten Realms Handbook? They are similarly
> powerful.

And IMO they're as bad as PCs at distorting the system. If I want
really powerful characters I'd rather get them by adding levels than
by boosting stats - the latter, IMO, cheapens really good scores by
making them commonplace amongst PCs and their contemporaries. Worse,
it makes encounter assesment ("balance", if you like) by the GM
harder. It can certainly work, and if it's what you want, cool, but
IME somewhat lower stats work better. The PCs and monsters are already
a cut above the normal guy in D&D, afterall.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 10:22:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:2cr871pa9r1kmmabaao0iiosqbe6n3tuks@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:13:35 -0700, "Malachias Invictus"
> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> Why is that, pray tell? If I wanted gritty fantasy, I would play GURPS.
>> I
>> want cinematic heroism and larger than life heroes, with foes and
>> challenges
>> to match. D&D is altogether suitable for this. Have you actually looked
>> at
>> the iconic NPCs in the Forgotten Realms Handbook? They are similarly
>> powerful.
>
> And IMO they're as bad as PCs at distorting the system.

They certainly are, if you consider high stats to be a distortion. Then
again, you could consider them powerful heroes, along the lines of Aragorn,
Conan, Gerald Tarrant, and the like.

> If I want really powerful characters I'd rather get them by adding levels
> than
> by boosting stats

That seems to parallel the old "experienced veteran vs talented beginner"
GURPS arguments. I think there is room for both preferences, and each lends
itself to a certain style of gaming.

> - the latter, IMO, cheapens really good scores by
> making them commonplace amongst PCs and their contemporaries.

I disagree. No matter *what* point total you use, it will become
commonplace in the group you mention, whether it is high or low. How are
they "cheapened"?

> Worse, it makes encounter assesment ("balance", if you like) by the GM
> harder.

I think that depends entirely upon what you are used to.

> It can certainly work, and if it's what you want, cool, but
> IME somewhat lower stats work better. The PCs and monsters are already
> a cut above the normal guy in D&D, afterall.

That is the case in just about every system, so it is not particularly
special. In a cinematic-style heroic roleplaying game, I feel the heroes
should be a bit larger than life. You cannot make a reasonable (i.e. not
"watered down") Conan or Aragorn with standard point buy. Quite frankly, it
is designed to punish more focussed characters. For a high powered (32
point) example, look at the total modifiers granted to someone with five
14s and a 12 for stats (+11). Now give this guy an 18. Without dipping
below 10, you would be looking at an 18, two 10s, and three 12s. The total
modifier is now only +7. It punishes those with high stats vs those who are
generalists.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 3:47:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 01 May 2005 11:03:17 -0500, Erol K. Bayburt
<ErolB1@comcast.net> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> Also, cheapening high stats isn't altogether a bad thing. If starting
> scores are capped at 18, then raising the average of each score will
> make opponent's 18s less dangerous. In particular, it makes spells
> less dangerous, which I think is a good thing.

IME it makes many spells almost ineffective, especially direct damage
spells with saves (eg Fireball). One-shot take-out spells become less
reliable, but they retain their value WRT direct damage (or enhance
it). This makes the thing I object to most in the magic system more
obvious - a lucky spellcaster can take out just about anything, which
is fine in fiction, often not so good in an rpg.

> If your average stat is in the 14-15 range, then your 18 will only
> give you a net +2 vs your peers, which makes it less dangerous, but
> you'll still have the full +4 vs ordinary joes, which allows your 18
> to retain most of its 'coolness' factor. This also makes it easier to
> 'power down' NPCs and monsters when you want to use relatively weak
> opponents - just give them normal stats. In a "standard point value"
> game, OTOH, you have to go through contortions if you want to create
> particularly weak opponents. (E.g. the troll in the Sunless Citidel
> module).

So instead, you prefer to have to build all the 'normal' strength
monster 'by hand', saving the pregen ones for 'weak' encounters. Seems
like extra effort to me. On top of that, high stats make characters
more capable for their level, so they can handle tougher encounters,
and thus level up faster. Fixing that requires re-working XP and
wealth awards, or redoing all the CRs. Redoing XP is easy, but redoing
wealth is not.

> Finally, making powerful characters with powerful via higher stats
> rather than via more levels makes them play differently and "feel"
> different. You point this out as a bug: High stats makes GMing harder.
> But it can also be a feature, if the high stat "feel" is what one
> wants. A Conan-clone just wouldn't feel very Conan-like if built with
> the standard array & a fistfull of extra levels, rather than with a
> high stat total and fewer character levels.

A Conan-clone will need a decent number of levels to replicate Conan
at any point past his initial arrival in civilisation anyway, because
he's a very experienced gladiator and did a fiar bit of thieving once
in the cities of the south.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 3:47:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:9rpa715mneffds70324rru8bfhgbbnpueg@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 01 May 2005 11:03:17 -0500, Erol K. Bayburt
> <ErolB1@comcast.net> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>> Also, cheapening high stats isn't altogether a bad thing. If starting
>> scores are capped at 18, then raising the average of each score will
>> make opponent's 18s less dangerous. In particular, it makes spells
>> less dangerous, which I think is a good thing.
>
> IME it makes many spells almost ineffective, especially direct damage
> spells with saves (eg Fireball).

Why is that? The save DCs are increasing at roughly the same rate as the
attribute save-boosts. Take into account also that it only takes 1
attribute to raise the save DC, whereas it takes 3 to boost all the saves
(unless you have Divine Grace or the like).

> One-shot take-out spells become less reliable,

Choosing your one-shot becomes a bit more important. You avoid Fortitude
take-outs for Fighter-types and Clerics, and Will take-outs for Clerics and
Wizards.

> but they retain their value WRT direct damage (or enhance
> it). This makes the thing I object to most in the magic system more
> obvious - a lucky spellcaster can take out just about anything, which
> is fine in fiction, often not so good in an rpg.

We tend to avoid or modify save-or-die effects, per Hong's method (Slay
Living does 4D6 Constitution damage on a failed save, and Destruction does
4D8).

>> If your average stat is in the 14-15 range, then your 18 will only
>> give you a net +2 vs your peers, which makes it less dangerous, but
>> you'll still have the full +4 vs ordinary joes, which allows your 18
>> to retain most of its 'coolness' factor. This also makes it easier to
>> 'power down' NPCs and monsters when you want to use relatively weak
>> opponents - just give them normal stats. In a "standard point value"
>> game, OTOH, you have to go through contortions if you want to create
>> particularly weak opponents. (E.g. the troll in the Sunless Citidel
>> module).
>
> So instead, you prefer to have to build all the 'normal' strength
> monster 'by hand', saving the pregen ones for 'weak' encounters.

That is not what I do. I use all monsters very effectively, for one. I
present difficult encounters. For "special" enemies I give the elite stats.
This would include PC-class enemies, as well as boss illithids, fiends,
dragons, undead, beholders, and the like.

> Seems like extra effort to me.

It is, a bit.

> On top of that, high stats make characters
> more capable for their level, so they can handle tougher encounters,
> and thus level up faster.

This does happen, relative to a lower powered game, but not quite as much as
you might think. Characters can take more abuse without resting, for
example.

> Fixing that requires re-working XP and
> wealth awards, or redoing all the CRs. Redoing XP is easy, but redoing
> wealth is not.

I have yet to have a problem with excessive wealth, actually. There are far
too many easy ways to eliminate it, or make it not directly combat-relevant
for the party.

>> Finally, making powerful characters with powerful via higher stats
>> rather than via more levels makes them play differently and "feel"
>> different. You point this out as a bug: High stats makes GMing harder.
>> But it can also be a feature, if the high stat "feel" is what one
>> wants. A Conan-clone just wouldn't feel very Conan-like if built with
>> the standard array & a fistfull of extra levels, rather than with a
>> high stat total and fewer character levels.
>
> A Conan-clone will need a decent number of levels to replicate Conan
> at any point past his initial arrival in civilisation anyway, because
> he's a very experienced gladiator and did a fiar bit of thieving once
> in the cities of the south.

That is true. It is also true that he will need to start with very high
stats (higher than the "high powered" point buy) in order to be true to
form.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
!