Using that idea, going from 0e to 3e, simply multiply the current level by 0.833 (repeating) and round... Going the other way around, multiply the 3e level by 1.2 to get the 0e level.
Using this method, a 36 level PC will equal (36/36=1*30=30) 30th level...
Let's try a more progmatic number, name level: 9/36=.25*30=7.5, round up to 8... or 9*0.833 (repeating) = 7.499 (repeating), effectively 7.5, rounding up to 8.
Going the other way, a 3e 15th level ruler would become (15/30=0.5*36=18), or 15*1.2=18.
Simple enough, and keeps the same level ratio of NPCs, which other methods (except 1:1) do not.
An idea for your perusal,
Roger
Roger
"It is suggested that you keep the same levels of experience in the two games up to level 14. Beyond, assume that each five D&D levels equal one character level in the AD&D 2nd Edition game, rounded up. Using this, a level 36 fighter becomes level 20 in the AD&D game."
Since the 3rd edition conversion booklet establishes that (for single classed characters, at least) 3rd ed D&D level is equal to 2nd ed AD&D level than we _know_ that the suggested conversions from Cyclopedia OD&D to 2nd ed should also be valid for 3rd ed, and by extension valid for 3.5 ed, per the notes on converting from 3rd ed to 3.5 ed.
Thus by the letter of this formula than
OD&D level 1-14 = an equal 3rd ed level,
OD&D level 15-19 = 3.5 ed level 15,
OD&D level 20-24 = 3.5 ed level 16,
OD&D level 25-29 = 3.5 ed level 17
OD&D level 30-34 = 3.5 ed level 18
OD&D level 35-36 = 3.5 ed level 19
However Allston clearly states that level 36 OD&D = level 20 AD&D 2nd ed.
Therefore his fomula is slightly off from his text.
If instead we make each _four_ OD&D levels after 14 = 1 AD&D level, rounded up, than we get the following chart:
OD&D level 1-14 = an equal 3rd ed level,
OD&D level 15-18 = 3.5 ed level 15,
OD&D level 19-22 = 3.5 ed level 16,
OD&D level 23-26 = 3.5 ed level 17
OD&D level 27-30 = 3.5 ed level 18
OD&D level 31-34 = 3.5 ed level 19
OD&D level 35-36 = 3.5 ed level 20
Of course Allston does say that these are 'suggested' conversions not required conversions.
If you use these conversions than perhaps OD&D characters on the path to Immortality = 3.5 ed Epic level characters. Maybe in Mystaran cosmology 'Immortal' is just a prestige class you can take after 30th level or so....
Simple enough, and keeps the same level ratio of NPCs, which other methods (except 1:1) do not.
OTOH, these methods do have some problems in preserving, e.g., a magic-user's power level -- if you go by a linear conversion, you'll find that the maximum spell level your magic user is able to cast changes with the edition, which isn't that good, IMO.
Spell progressions are very similar among OD&D, AD&D and 3e up to (circa) level 10. Thereafter, progression is slightly skewed so that wizards are able to cast 9th level spells at levels 21, 18 and 17 respectively -- so in this interval, 3 OD&D levels are circa equal to 2 AD&D or 3e levels.
From that point on, AD&D wizards tend to get more power/level than OD&D magic-users, so that a 30th level Wizard in AD&D has the same spells as a 30th level MU in OD&D, plus True Dweomers.
3e wizards, OTOH, are not anymore comparable beyond 20th level, though at that level they have the same number of 9th level spells as a 27th level OD&D MU, suggesting a 2 to 1 ratio.
GP
You are correct, 3e has no level cap, however it is assumed, and encouraged by many authorities such as Skip Williams and the new "Sage" (I forget his name), that DM's make the assumption the standard...
By 'the assumption' do you mean your assertion in the first post that there are 30 levels? I'd be interested to see where that information comes from, as I've never seen anything from Skip Williams or anyone else to indicate that that is what they base things on.
Just the opposite, in fact- it seems to me that level 20 is pretty much assumed to be the end of the line, and that very little effort is put into gearing monsters/characters for Epic levels. James Jacobs (of Dungeon magazine editorial fame) has posted many times (among others, such as Andy Collins, IIRC) that their research shows that few people actually play campaigns beyond 10th level, for various reasons, and that is why the majority of game support material is situated around low to mid-level campaigns.
I'll see if I can find some quotes from the designers about this- I know it's been talked about before...
[EDIT- here's one recent quote sort of addressing the topic. I know there's been reams written about it, just can't quite find more. Will keep looking, though.]
Actually... according to market research (and supported by my own experience over the last several years spent working on Dungeon), WotC's doing about the right amount of support for Epic games. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that the vast majority of D&D players lose interest in a campaign well before 20th level. The amount of players interested in epic material (of which I count myself as one) is relatively small. Smaller than psionics fans.
(Portion in bold emphasized by me)
Original post
My philosophy is this: it's best to design stat blocks for demon lords in the mid 20s, since the majority of D&D games don't progress past level 20.
Original post
OTOH, these methods do have some problems in preserving, e.g., a magic-user's power level -- if you go by a linear conversion, you'll find that the maximum spell level your magic user is able to cast changes with the edition, which isn't that good, IMO.
Spell progressions are very similar among OD&D, AD&D and 3e up to (circa) level 10. Thereafter, progression is slightly skewed so that wizards are able to cast 9th level spells at levels 21, 18 and 17 respectively -- so in this interval, 3 OD&D levels are circa equal to 2 AD&D or 3e levels.
From that point on, AD&D wizards tend to get more power/level than OD&D magic-users, so that a 30th level Wizard in AD&D has the same spells as a 30th level MU in OD&D, plus True Dweomers.
3e wizards, OTOH, are not anymore comparable beyond 20th level, though at that level they have the same number of 9th level spells as a 27th level OD&D MU, suggesting a 2 to 1 ratio.
GP
This is interesting, but isn't it equally true that if you compare a 20th level Fighter in OD&D and AD&D, the OD&D fighter will be much more powerful than the AD&D one?
I liked an idea Cthulhudrew presented some time ago about how Master level (ie 26+) characters should be considered Epic level. I can't remember what conversion system was used though.
One I originally used was making every OD&D level beyond 10th to count as 1/2 level when converting so that a 36th level character would equal a 10+(26/2=13)=23rd level 3E character.
A 26th level character would then become an 18th level character under the 3E system.
I like the idea of at least having Etienne D'Ambreville and the 1000 Wizards of Alphatia as Epic Level characters, even if only by a few levels.
OTOH, I am also attracted to the concept presented by someone over at the paizo forum about how 36 levels is an iconic Mystara thing, so we should just keep it that way to keep it simple. I guess that is what Traianus is suggesting as well.
I am torn between these different systems. I think when making conversions, it would only be reasonable to present which system one is using...
Havard
This is interesting, but isn't it equally true that if you compare a 20th level Fighter in OD&D and AD&D, the OD&D fighter will be much more powerful than the AD&D one?
Maybe, but the issue is more interesting for wizards and other spellcasters, since it causes some reality changes -- while the fighter progresses smoothly (basically, he is more likely to hit and has more HPs), the wizard has clear power steps that should be preserved.
If a fighter is converted and loses some HPs, that's not a big issue. OTOH, it the wizard is suddenly not anymore able to cast a Wish, that's a completely different matter, IMO.
Of course, you could have different conversions for different classes -- not that unreasonable, since in AD&D and OD&D each class has a different XP progression.
I liked an idea Cthulhudrew presented some time ago about how Master level (ie 26+) characters should be considered Epic level. I can't remember what conversion system was used though.
Its a variation of the one the conversion group came up with, and that Traianus mentions above. Levels 1-15 = 1 to 1, 16 and up every 2 levels = 1 level. So a 36th level character is a 26th level character. Just a general guideline, though, as I think there are certainly exceptions (someone like, say, Barimoor, is probably higher than 26).
OTOH, I am also attracted to the concept presented by someone over at the paizo forum about how 36 levels is an iconic Mystara thing, so we should just keep it that way to keep it simple. I guess that is what Traianus is suggesting as well.
The thing to bear in mind is that once you get past 20th level, there isn't really the same scaling power-wise that you have in the 1-20 level range. Having never actually run an Epic game (disclaimer) I can't personally attest to how it affects things, but from reports and discussions I've read with people who have run Epic games (and designers who have run and designed for them), it is quite different. A 36th level 3.5 character is going to be quite farther along the power scale compared to a 20th level 3.5 character than a 36th level OD&D character is compared to a 20th level OD&D character.
Its a variation of the one the conversion group came up with, and that Traianus mentions above. Levels 1-15 = 1 to 1, 16 and up every 2 levels = 1 level. So a 36th level character is a 26th level character. Just a general guideline, though, as I think there are certainly exceptions (someone like, say, Barimoor, is probably higher than 26).
Interestingly, this works very well with the situation Agathokles mentioned about Mages gettig 9th level spells as a 21st level OD&D character becomes an 18th level character after conversions.
Agathokles: Although you have a point about different conversion for each class being more accurate that would IMO make things a wee bit too complicated. We already have to deal with classes not neccesarily being the same in each system.
I also agree with Cthulhudrew and others who have pointed out that indivdual allowances should be made for particular kinds of characters.
Havard
Agathokles: Although you have a point about different conversion for each class being more accurate that would IMO make things a wee bit too complicated. We already have to deal with classes not neccesarily being the same in each system.
I know. Luckily, as Cthulhudrew reported, most campaigns are played in the traditional level range 1-10 rather than in the high level range, so for most purposes a 1 to 1 conversion is sufficient.
I know. Luckily, as Cthulhudrew reported, most campaigns are played in the traditional level range 1-10 rather than in the high level range, so for most purposes a 1 to 1 conversion is sufficient.
Using this method means 1-15 will be on the 1:1 scale meaning alot of the Gaz NPCs (Pre DotE) will also be unaffected.
Havard
The thing to bear in mind is that once you get past 20th level, there isn't really the same scaling power-wise that you have in the 1-20 level range. Having never actually run an Epic game (disclaimer) I can't personally attest to how it affects things, but from reports and discussions I've read with people who have run Epic games (and designers who have run and designed for them), it is quite different. A 36th level 3.5 character is going to be quite farther along the power scale compared to a 20th level 3.5 character than a 36th level OD&D character is compared to a 20th level OD&D character.
I have run a short epic campaign, and the power difference between a 36 level OD&D character and and 36 level 3.5E character is big (very big for spellcasters). An epic fighter with the right feats can kill a foe, regardless of hp, in one blow on a critical hit. An epic spellcaster has fewer spell slots than their equivalent OD&D caster, but they have access to epic spells which blow away any normal spell. With all the metamagic available too, magic can be made to hit for maximum damage, affect huge areas, or last much longer. Rogues can hide in plain sight and completely avoid all damage from an attack by a foe. Epic means exactly what it sounds like.
To me, a straight 1:1 conversion would make high-end OD&D characters far more powerful than they are intended to be. When looking at the powerful iconic NPC's of other settings, they seem to be in the 20-30 range- if I'm not mistaken Elminster is only a 28th level character officially. Certainly, room for exceptions can be made as needed, but on the whole I wouldn't have anyone above 25th without a very, very good reason.
However rather than using actual 3E Epic Level rules, I'd just extend the existing classes up to 36th level. For example, if you have a 30th level fighter he has 30 hit dice, attacks as +30/+25/+20/+15, continues the same feat progression etc. A 30th level magic user does not get additional new spells, he gets more of the same spells just like in OD&D. (It's trivially easy to extend the 3E spell chart as high as you want to go)
Of course it's not necessary to extend the classes beyond 20th, with so many prestige classes added on. Take 20 levels in a base class, 10 levels in a prestige class, and 6 levels in a seconardy prestige class, and you've got a 36th level character. I don't understand the eagerness to restrict levels, the prestige class rules finally give us a means to differentiate all those 36th level epic Mystaran characters from each other.
As far as matching spells exactly, I wouldn't bother. New game system, new assumptions. If you want to preserve a specific NPC, tweak his character level individually, but there is no need to do that to all NPCs. For 95% of them we have no spell lists and no real reason to assume spells of a particular level, other than their character level (and anyone of 21+ has all the same spells anway)
One difference is Wish/Miracle, which you don't get until 33rd level in OD&D. Again I'd just go with 3E and allow it as a normal 9th level spells, epsecially since the 3E version is much weaker. The OD&D wish is a true wish, and would be equivalent to epic level magic in 3E terms.
Finally I'd note that the rare campaigns that have reached 20th or 30th level have taken many years to play and the characters are truly epic in history and ability. Knocking them down to 16th level or even 25th level in 3E terms cheapens this accomplishment and status and allows it to be easily reached (relatively).
Anyway, 1:1 for me.
I have run a short epic campaign, and the power difference between a 36 level OD&D character and and 36 level 3.5E character is big (very big for spellcasters).
The power difference at 1st level is big too (very big for spellcasters).
3.XE is D&D on steroids, everything is amplified. If you're gonna play the game, play it! Mystara was tailor made for epic level, and if you consider immortals then even 3.X Epic Level is low-powered by comparison. 36th level is not a destination, it is only a stop on the road, the halfway point at best. If a conversion stops at 20th level, then 20th level characters would jump straight to immortality and there wouldn't be any epic level characters at all. That just doesn't feel right to me, on many levels.
Different game, different feel, different power level. When you change game systems that comes with the territory.
(IMO the AD&D conversion stopped at 20th because AD&D had poor support for levels 15+ and officially capped at 20th. They couldn't convert a 35th level character straight across, because there were no 35th level AD&D characters, no 35th level adventures, no 35th level challenges! But 3E does have that support.)
The power difference at 1st level is big too (very big for spellcasters).
3.XE is D&D on steroids, everything is amplified. If you're gonna play the game, play it! Mystara was tailor made for epic level, and if you consider immortals then even 3.X Epic Level is low-powered by comparison. 36th level is not a destination, it is only a stop on the road, the halfway point at best. If a conversion stops at 20th level, then 20th level characters would jump straight to immortality and there wouldn't be any epic level characters at all. That just doesn't feel right to me, on many levels.
Different game, different feel, different power level. When you change game systems that comes with the territory.
(IMO the AD&D conversion stopped at 20th because AD&D had poor support for levels 15+ and officially capped at 20th. They couldn't convert a 35th level character straight across, because there were no 35th level AD&D characters, no 35th level adventures, no 35th level challenges! But 3E does have that support.)
I agree the systems are different and have a different feel. At least on my end, this discussion does not include the Immortals (and characters that attain that status). Additionally, I'm not saying stop the conversion at level 20 or that epic levels should not be used- I'm merely advocating the use of the 1:1 conversion to level 14, 2:1 afterwards which gives you an epic 3.5E 25th level character.
The point is I want to keep the power levels relative to each other. IMO a straight conversion to 36th makes the converted way more powerful than it should be, relatively speaking. When the pre-eminent spellcaster of another high magic fantasy setting is 28th level in 3.5E (I hope my memory is correct), that gives us a standard of conversion we can look at for NPCs and we need to then look long and hard at the ramifications of having 1,000 36th level epic wizards running ONE country. At 25th level (in 3.5E) NPCs are quite powerful, and have just tasted epic power, and certain casters may well be adjusted upwards as needed. For characters, they can always gain more through their epic adventures.
I am willing to concede a split-conversion, like 2:1 up to a certain level, and 1:1 beyond that. However, I think if that method is used, the 1:1 should be at the lower end of the chart to make the general adventuring population a bit bottom-heavy.... There's ALOT more fledgeling hedge wizards than master sages...
Roger
The thinks I take into consideration, when considering the different options here... I certainly want to use the full-range of options... even if most gamers quit after 10 levels, some don't... and while the majority of gamers don't play Mystara, there is still a need for it--however small the consumer base may be.
I am willing to concede a split-conversion, like 2:1 up to a certain level, and 1:1 beyond that. However, I think if that method is used, the 1:1 should be at the lower end of the chart to make the general adventuring population a bit bottom-heavy.... There's ALOT more fledgeling hedge wizards than master sages...
Roger
I dont see that this should neccesarily be reflected when converting existing NPCs or old PCs though.
I think the systems presented by Traianus and Cthulhudrew work best. I actually like shifting after 15th level best, probably because of some metric thing...
Havard
The point is I want to keep the power levels relative to each other.
If that's what you want, I don't think spell slots can be meaningfully compared, since 3E gets bonuses for abilities AND can scribe scrolls easily. Spell levels provide a hard "jump" in ability that cannot be bypassed. Further, converting spell levels I'd use the MU as a basis, since clerics are very different and hard to compare meaningfully. So using MU spell levels as a basis, we can make an almost perfect conversion up to level 20:
Convert 1:1 up to 8th level, then 2:3 after that:
0E>3E 0E>3E 0E>3E 0E>3E
----- ----- ----- -----
01>01 10>10 19>16 28>22
02>02 11>10 20>16 29>22
03>03 12>11 21>17 30>23
04>04 13>12 22>18 31>24
05>05 14>12 23>18 32>24
06>06 15>13 24>19 33>25
07>07 16>14 25>20 34>26
08>08 17>14 26>20 35>26
09>09 18>15 27>21 36>27
The only discrepancy is at OD&D level 11, where a sixth level spells is converted down to 5th level. But otherwise it matches spell levels exactly. Also OD&D 27th level -> 3E 21st level, which is fairly close to the idea that "Master" = "Epic". This conversion tops out at 36th level -> 27th level.