D&D 3E/3.5 Converting Exceptional Strength to 3E

[IanB]

We used it when we converted over. To my way of thinking, it was a trade-off. My 18/89 turned into a 21, and my con of 12 stayed there despite the fact that under the new rules I would have never lost a point from dying and would still have a 16, and would likely have still been the same level, since level caps for demi-humans were removed. Essentially, it worked out as if I had put all of my leveling points into strength.

Of corse, it is less fair for non-fighters. Especially ones that died a lot.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Although I agree that the conversion table for exceptional strength is too high, I don't think this is what WotC meant for players to do. The conversion was so players could continue their campaign and characters that started in 2e. Anyone who now did what you described should be laughed at and forced to make a legitimate 3e character.

The original purpose of those rules was to offer a taste of 3e that preserved the "feel" of the 2e characters even if it caused complete havoc with play balance.

For example, multiclassed PCs gained a huge boost in the original conversion notes -- potentially far outstripping a higher level single classed character.

The conversion notes are a marketting tool for 3e, and were never written as a serious piece of game design. They just wanted people to give 3e a try before being dissuaded by whining pimple-faced kids who didn't like what happened to their Elven Ranger/Cavalier/Wizard with 18/00. So they threw a few bones to the munchkins and expected 2e would be quickly forgotten; soon pure 3e campaigns would dominate the day and the portability problems would disappear on their own.

In my experience, 2e characters converted to 3e are exceedingly strong in terms of stats and wealth. So much so that we gave up and created 3e characters using point buy and standard wealth levels while keeping our character backstories. Some people just made new characters. We decided the conversion notes had some useful pointers but were worthless in terms of detail.

 

[da chicken]

I'm currently playing a character who was converted from 2E to 3E and had exceptional strength (18/61). A Paladin, actually, and I got a free 17 from my DM for Cha. Guess where my first level raise went?

At any rate, from experience I can say you should convert exceptional strength to 18 if there is any way you can convince your players it is for the best. We converted at 6th and we're now 10th. Everyone else in the game was multiclass before conversion, and even though they ended a level higher than me after conversion, I still dominated 3E combat. Only now, with my DM becoming more and more stingy with magic items, are the other players catching up. In 2E, it was exactly the opposite.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Because of 2e's broken stat system (only fighters get exceptional Strength, even dwarven clerics can't get bonus hp for a Con of 17, you needed a Strength of 16 to even start seeing bonuses), I would suggest using point buy. Maybe dice-rolling if your PCs don't cheat, and don't mind seeing some characters being plain better than other characters. Just be sure to give your paladin as high a Strength as possible, to match your 2e character concept.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

da chicken,

What can I say? Your story shows how messed up the conversion guidelines were.

When we first tried converting our 2e characters our stats all had at least three 16s or better, making our characters 40something in point buy. We had triple the suggested wealth for our level. We walked all over encounters of CR=level+1 even with clumsy tactics for 3e.

We reinvented our characters to achieve some kind of sanity, although there was a lot of grumbling at first I think the players accepted the DM decision as well reasoned.

 

[Grazzt]

When my group switched to 3e and we converted from our game (which was a hybrid of 1e/2e..more 1e though) we converted exceptional Strength as 18's only. All of us agreed it was kinda goofy the way WotC set it up.

That's just us though...

 

[the Jester]

I think it's pretty well impossible to convert a 1e or 2e character into a "balanced" 3e character for the simple reason of character wealth. Nowadays it's very integrated into the balance of the game, but back in the day an easy way to make a low-level character viable within a higher-level group was to give them a few powerful magic items.

It isn't just exceptional strength that needs fixin' when converting old school characters.

HOWEVER- I feel that balance is secondary to preserving a campaign's integrity. So what if there's no way a 10th level character in 3e should have a vorpal sword? If the character you played for FIVE YEARS (real time) got one in 2e, and just barely hit 10th level, he should keep it... he earned it!

Now, that doesn't mean that he should expect to see it never get targeted by a disintigrate, turned into green slime, shattered, sundered, etc.... but it shouldn't be arbitrarily taken away cuz it doesn't fit the wealth guidelines.

In similar vein, a fighter with an 18(00) strength really ought to be stronger than a 2e psionicist with an 18 strength once they're both converted. It's only fair; it was one of his advantages. And really, if converted characters are tougher than 'standard' 3e pcs of their level, all that means is you can throw tougher challenges at them.

For example, how many 2e characters fought and slew a marilith by 10th level?

How many 3e characters have?

You see my point... 2e characters were practically legendary MUCH earlier than 3e characters are. Epic level came around 1oth-14th, imo... when everyone reaches "name level" (old school concept there!)

It's really, really hard to do a fair conversion. My advice: don't mix 2e pcs with 3e pcs until the converted 2e pcs have had a chance to "equalize" over time, i.e. until they've leveled up enought to justify their magic items or lost a bunch of them due to attrition or whatever.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I agree that mixing converted PCs with straight-up 3e PCs may be a bad idea, but I think it's fine to convert entire groups for continued play in 3e. My converted 2e group is actually WEAKER than a 3e group of comparable level, largely because magic items were so darn difficult to create in 2e and because I rationed them out in tiny portions as treasure.

I'm with Ridley's Cohort here; exceptional strength should just convert to an 18 for balance reasons. However, because I'm such a nice guy, I awarded the 18/51 Str ranger in the party a Str of 19, and the 18/00 Str barbarian a Str of 20. But then I'm a fan of high ability-score PCs. (That ranger, incidentally, has a Con score of 7 due to repeated resurrections!)

As for conversion: My suggestion is to have people rebuild their characters from the ground up. The way I did it was to allow the players to keep their PCs' ability scores and equipment, and then generate everything else anew. Levels were converted on an XP basis, in order to avoid what I think is the biggest flaw of the "official" conversion process: giving 2e thieves and bards far too much bang for the buck compared to wizards, etc. I set each PC's effective 3e character level equal to the level on the 2e paladin/ranger table that matched the PC's current XP total. PCs were then allowed to divide up their levels between class levels as they saw fit. Hit points were generated anew, and players were allowed to select skills and feats as they wished. Characters who chose item creation feats were allowed to "buy" additional magic items of gp value equal to 25% of their total pool of items.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Although I agree that the conversion table for exceptional strength is too high, I don't think this is what WotC meant for players to do. The conversion was so players could continue their campaign and characters that started in 2e. Anyone who now did what you described should be laughed at and forced to make a legitimate 3e character.

What they meant for people to do doesn not matter. What they made possible for people to do is the important thing. And of course it is rediculous, but technically possible. So the munchkins would try to get that through, would fail, and would whine. Better prevent the very idea!

 

[kreynolds]

What they meant for people to do doesn not matter.

So it does matter?