Gruule The Axe
PS: I would have just searched the boards but the search is down. I seem to remember seeing some really good advice about this module on here before.
Better still, while I won't mention which one, since I suspect discussing competitors may be against WoTC's rules, there is an RPG system currently in print which has a module very closely based on ToEE. The system and the module were produced under licence to WoTC, and I suspect that if you don't know which system I mean, you would find out by asking at your FLGS.
I like 3.5ed for some types of campaign, but it's not the only system out there.
Are you certain that you wish to use the D&D 3.5ed rules?
Thanks for the suggestion but I'm sure I want to do The Temple of Elemental Evil and I'm sure I want to use D&D 3.5. It's what we play now.
Besides, there used to be a very interesting conversion of T1-T4 on ENWorld. *Forgot the exact link.*
Also, some articles in the Oerth Journals can be useful, such as a description of Verbobonc and an adventure in the Lortmils in the earlier issues.
A few things:
Many of the maps tend to be too cramped for tactical minitures combat. Like you'll have a 20 by 20 foot room with 15 orcs in it.
You probably want to spend time rebuilding the major NPCs, especially the multiclassed ones.
Old modules occasionally describe things in flat percentages or die rolls, like saying there's a 1 in 6 chance of slipping on ice. You might want to go through and set appropiate DCs for those. The conversion doc you have probably does most of that.
1.) Rebuild the main villains first (Lareth of the Moathouse, the 4 Elemental Priests, Falrinth [and maybe Smigmal], and the Head Priest [plus their major assistants].) Try writing down their motivations and building them from scratch (including multi-classing and prestige class/es). You'd be surprised how some of them turn out.
2.) Redo the map, as previously stated, the rooms are a bit too small using the combat system of 3.5E. (Also a couple of my players could draw the moathouse and first 2 levels of the Temple from memory).
Remember, the important thing is to keep the flavor of the module.
Well, actually, you might want to rethink the motivation somewhat.
The ENWORLD conversion is pretty good, its an almost direct conversion of the original module.
EDITED: If you need any help just PM me.
I figured you would. You'll need to beef it up a heck of a lot, then. The module as written would be a walk in the park for characters under 3.5 rules.
I have a 3.5 conversion of this and I can assure you it is no walk in the park. Some of the more important denizens of the undertemple end up with CR's WAY above the original.
Unrelated to the above - If you group hated the "Return to..." why do you think they might like the original? What were their reasons for not liking RttToEE? If one of the reasons is "long dungeon crawl" I would be hesitant.
I have heavily edited and merged a converted ToEE with the RttToEE. The party has been to the moathouse (original). They are now off adventuring elsewhere. They will eventually make it back to Hommlett and the resurgent moathouse to clear it again (Return) and check out the temple, which they conveniently (for my story) left for NPC's to assault. I will not be using the huge mountain temple from RttToEE (the main dungeon). I am going with another layout entirely, but will include some of the more clever ideas and encounters.
DM
I figured you would. You'll need to beef it up a heck of a lot, then. The module as written would be a walk in the park for characters under 3.5 rules.
Really? I did a quick CR/EL analysis of the module using the conversion I got off of EN World and it seemed pretty tough, especially in spots. Admittedly, the challenges aren't a nice ramp-up of difficulty – they tend to peak and valley a lot – but I like that. It's random, more like reality. It keeps my players on their toes. They won't be able to assume that every encounter will be something they can defeat out of hand using 20% of their resources or whatever. They'll need to make choices and run sometimes in order to live to fight another day.
That said, I do plan to modify the adventure to fit my vision of things somewhat, especially, as I said before, the larger monsters and the important NPCs. But keeping the original flavor is important.
Yes, indeed. Keep magic in your party low and *start making your own maps from the Temple*, I myself am going more and more confused with the dozens of rooms and nods there. *If you draw you own map based on the material, you get a more in-depth look on what you're talking about, IMO.*
That's a good idea. I was just going to scan the original maps and then place monsters on them using Photoshop. It might be just as easy to make my own and help me get more familiar with the placement of the denizens.
Besides, there used to be a very interesting conversion of T1-T4 on ENWorld.
Yep, this is the conversion I have. It's pretty good but needs some modification, especially with all the new books that are out since it was done. The NPCs need an overhaul.
Also, some articles in the Oerth Journals can be useful, such as a description of Verbobonc and an adventure in the Lortmils in the earlier issues.
Do you have a link for Oerth Journals? I found a site that had a bunch of nice maps and info on shopping in Verbobonc - very handy.
Are you familar with 1e rules and do you have access to the books still? If so you shouldn't have much trouble converting it 3.5e.
Yes, I'm very familiar with 1st edition and have been playing 3.0/3.5 since it came out.
Many of the maps tend to be too cramped for tactical minitures combat. Like you'll have a 20 by 20 foot room with 15 orcs in it.
I wondered about that. I remember quite a few of the rooms being fairly small. It seems like a good idea to redo the maps for a lot of reasons.
You probably want to spend time rebuilding the major NPCs, especially the multiclassed ones.
I had planned on doing this but I was wondering if anyone else had already done some NPC rebuilds that they had good success with. My intent is to stay as true to the original flavor and general storyline of the module as much as possible but also to update things enough to be interesting and challenging within the new scope of the game (i.e. 3.5).
You might want to go through and set appropiate DCs for those. The conversion doc you have probably does most of that.
I think the conversion I have has DCs for traps and such but not really for any of the more flavorful Gygaxian items.
I've actually done some conversion of ToEE to 3E (and once more to 3.5E), you might want to consider the following:
1.) Rebuild the main villains first (Lareth of the Moathouse, the 4 Elemental Priests, Falrinth [and maybe Smigmal], and the Head Priest [plus their major assistants].) Try writing down their motivations and building them from scratch (including multi-classing and prestige class/es). You'd be surprised how some of them turn out.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to doing the rebuilds on the NPCs - should be fun. Any pointers, since you've done them each a couple times over?
2.) Redo the map, as previously stated, the rooms are a bit too small using the combat system of 3.5E. (Also a couple of my players could draw the moathouse and first 2 levels of the Temple from memory).
Yeah, this is something I hadn't really considered doing but seems like an important addition to the conversion checklist. Luckily, none of my current players have ever been thru TToEE. It's definitely high up on my must-play list of modules so I wanted to take them thru it.
The ENWORLD conversion is pretty good, its an almost direct conversion of the original module.
EDITED: If you need any help just PM me.
Thanks! I'll do that. And if you have any materials or links that you've found especially helpful, please send 'em along ([email=rolljunkie@sbcglobal.net]rolljunkie@sbcglobal.net[/email]). I start the campaign in 6-8 weeks so I don't have much prep time.
Unrelated to the above - If you group hated the "Return to..." why do you think they might like the original? What were their reasons for not liking RttToEE? If one of the reasons is "long dungeon crawl" I would be hesitant.
No, it wasn't the fact that it was a dungeon crawl - it was a fun hack-n-slash fest - it was more the way the module was laid out and the spotty nature of the storyline, kind of tacked together. Honestly though, we didn't get too far into it and I may even tack part of RTToEE onto the end of TToEE (maybe the new "outpost" temple is just being started and the PCs need to try and raze the evil before it fully takes root). IMO, TToEE is a lot different (and better) than RTToEE. Just my opinion though. Plus, since none of them have played TToEE before, I thought it would be fun to run. We're all old school gamers and have done most of the Gygax modules but somehow they all missed this one.
I will not be using the huge mountain temple from RttToEE (the main dungeon). I am going with another layout entirely, but will include some of the more clever ideas and encounters.DM
I think that's a cool idea. I was thinking about leaving the RTToEE complex the same but keeping 90% of the outer areas uninfested and focusing on just the central portion within the lake. The characters would basically be trying to stop the cult from starting a "branch" in the mountains. It would take some reworking of the story and the encounters but, your right, some of the stuff in RTToEE is really good and should be used. Thanks for the creative push!
http://zans.clanplaid.net/
It's got some good general info on the area, a RTToEE conversion to 3.5, some useful files for download, and an archive of the Monte Cook board devoted to RTToEE.
By the way, thanks everybody for the tips - useful stuff. I'd really be interested in seeing what other folks have done with the NPCs especially. But anything else you have to add, I will gladly welcome. Feel free to email me too.
As direct links usually don't work here,just google for *Canonfire!*.
I am also going to start a ToEE 3.5 campaign this summer, and 1e is no discussion for me, too.
I just don't have the time/money/will to collect every 1e game supplement that would be needed to play 1e properly, not to mention that I would take some more time to learn the rules for that *old* new system...
However, if you've players familar with that rule set, it could be worth the try...
Herein dwells Smigmal Redhand, a half-orc Fighter/Assassin. She is the leman of Falrinth (in area 337) and leader of the band of brigands in the outer ruins (Tower). Upon hearing noise in the basilisk area, she dons her ring of spell storing (of five invisibility spells) and carefully opens the door a crack to see what is happening. If opportunity presents itself, she uses one of the ring's charges, creeps out and tries to assassinate the most powerful-appearing of the intruders, attacking from behind the victim. Smigmal is disguised as an elf, and if captured when appearing (due to her attack) will try to dupe the party into believing that she is charmed or otherwise forced to attack, believing intruders to be nasty invaders. If this also seems to fail, she tries to use invisibility to escape, climbs a wall, and hides in overhead shadows.
Smigmal wears leather armor +1, uses a shield +2, and wields a shortsword +1 in normal combat (or a non-glowing normal shortsword in assassination attempts). She is thoroughly evil, and loves her work. She hungers for power to make humans suffer, and hates her human ancestry. She sees Falrinth as her tool, the one who will best aid her in gaining her power. She will fight
to protect Falrinth if such action appears worthwhile, but will certainly try to save herself from certain death. Smigmal wears two earrings (each worth 400 gp) and a jeweled belt (3, 200 gp), and carries 7 gp and 12 ep in a purse. She knows how most creatures react favorably to bloodstones, and has been trading for and accumulating such for future purposes
Her stats are:
Smigmal Redhand: AC 4 (leather +1) & shield +2), MV 12", Level 7/7 Fighter/Assassin, hp 41, XP 4924 S 17 I 15 W 7 D 16 Co 17 Ch 14 #AT 3/2, D 3-8, SA poison on sword (insinuative type B, + 3 bonus to saving throw, Dmg 25 in 2 rounds), SD ring of invisibility; Thief Abilities: PP 45, OL 52, F/RT 45, MS 40, HS 31, HN 25, CW 95, RL 15
Breaking the stats down I get the following as the original ability scores of Smigmal before racial adjustments:
STR 16 (1/2 Orcs in 1E have a +1 bonus)
INT 15
WIS 07
DEX 16
CON 16 (1/2 Orcs in 1E have a +1 bonus)
CHA 16 (1/2 Orcs in 1E have a -2 penalty)
Now, I reasoned that as nice and as intimidating a 1/2Orc is, a 1/2Elf might just work better. So I reassigned her ability scores to better fit a charming and sly assassin type.
Smigmal Redhand; 1/2Elf
STR 16
DEX 16
CON 07 (the level 4 ability increase goes here)
INT 16 (the 16 means she gets 3 bonus skill points per level)
WIS 15 (the level 8 ability increase goes here)
CHA 16
Giving her the net ability scores (with bonuses) as follows:
STR 16 [+3]
DEX 16 [+3]
CON 08 [-1]
INT 16 [+3]
WIS 16 [+3]
CHA 16 [+3]
Now since a 7/7 1E character is roughly 10th level, to give her a decent fighting ability, as well as an all-around good sneaking ability, I gave her the following levels
LEVEL CLASS BAB FORT RFLX WILL Skill Points HD
1 Rogue +0 +0 +2 +0 44 d6
2 Fighter +1 +2 +0 +0 5 d10
3 Rogue +1 +0 +1 +0 11 d6
4 Fighter +1 +1 +0 +0 5 d10
5 Rogue +1 +1 +0 +1 11 d6
6 Fighter +1 +0 +1 +1 5 d10
7 Fighter +1 +1 +0 +0 5 d10
8 Rogue +1 +0 +1 +0 11 d6
9 Assassin +0 +0 +2 +0 7 d6
10 Assassin +1 +0 +1 +0 7 d6
Total +8 +5 +8 +2 111
Skills 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 Ranks Ability Synergy Race Feats Total
Balance 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 2 - - 10
Bluff 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Climb 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Craft: Alchemy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 3 2 - - 9
Diplomacy 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 5 3 2 2 - 12
Disable Device 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Disguise 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 2 - - 10
Escape Artist 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Forgery 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Gather Information 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 - 2 - 5
Handle Animal 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Hide 4 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 - - - 11
Intimidate 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 3 2 - - 10
Jump 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 2 - - 10
Listen 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 -1 - 1 2 7
Move Silently 4 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 - - - 11
Open Locks 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 - - - 8
Ride 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 - - 5
Search 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 - 1 - 9
Sense Motive 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 3 2 - - 10
Sleight of Hand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 2 - - 6
Spot 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 -1 - 1 2 7
Tumble 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 2 - - 10
Use Rope 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5 3 - - - 8
Feats
Alertness (Character Feat LVL01)
Armor Proficiency (Light, Medium, and Heavy)
Combat Expertise (Character Feat LVL06)
Death Attack
Dodge (Fighter Feat LVL01)
Evasion
Improved Uncanny Dodge
Mobility(Character Feat LVL03)
Poison Save Bonus +1
Poison Use
Shield Proficiency (All)
Sneak Attack +3d6
Spring Attack (Character Feat LVL09)
Trap Sense +1
Trapfinding
Uncanny Dodge
Weapon Focus: Short Sword (Fighter Feat LVL02)
Weapon Proficiency (Simple and Martial Weapons)
Weapon Specialization: Short Sword (Fighter Feat LVL04)
For equipment, I swapped the Leather +1 for a set of Bracers of Armor +3; the Shield +2 became a Ring of Force Shield; and the Short Sword +1 was traded in for Sword of Subtlety; the Ring of Invisibility was kept for being just too cool to lose.
This is a pretty good combatant assassin who is fairly good at lying.
Sorry I couldn't figure out how to paste the tables properly.
Is all this conversion effort worth it? The easiest way to keep the 1st-edition feel would be to play that game.
It's worth it. If you are familiar with both systems, the conversion is pretty easy. If you aren't familiar with 1e, you probably don't have the choice, you may not have the books and your players probably want to play 3e.
For me, the "First Edition Feel" comes from the adventures, not the rules. I think all gamers, whether they playing 1st, 2nd, 3rd edition, Gurps, Hero or whatever should play the Greyhawk classics.
For me, the "First Edition Feel" comes from the adventures, not the rules. I think all gamers, whether they playing 1st, 2nd, 3rd edition, Gurps, Hero or whatever should play the Greyhawk classics.
Hear! Hear!
A quote for the eternity!
It's worth it. If you are familiar with both systems, the conversion is pretty easy.
I'm new in the D&D and have only 3.5 books. Which books I need to know 1-st Edition rule AD&D to convert TToEE?
I'm new in the D&D and have only 3.5 books. Which books I need to know 1-st Edition rule AD&D to convert TToEE?
I would say that knowing how things worked in 1st edition is helpful but not essential. There's a 3rd Edition Conversion Manual PDF done by Skip Williams floating around somewhere that helps with the general stuff. Ahhh...here's the link:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnD_CYC_intro.asp
There's some difference between the advice therein (3.0) and 3.5 rules but it's a good place to start.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=260104&highlight=temple+elemental+evil
Mike
I'm new in the D&D and have only 3.5 books. Which books I need to know 1-st Edition rule AD&D to convert TToEE?
There are 3 basic things you need from the old books.
Spells from 1e that didn't make it into 3e. Player's Handbook
Monsters that didn't make it. Monster Manual. But these old adventures were great about introducing their own monsters, so it may just be a matter of being able to read the stat block.
Magic Items - Some magic items didn't make it or work differently. Dungeon Masters guide.
The conversion document takes care of all this. When an adventure has a spell or item that has no equivilent in 3e, I usually leave it as is, rather than convert it to something 3e.
For example the "Legendary Sword of Lyons" from A3. This strange item is constantly invisible, and turns its weilder invisible the first time its drawn that day. I left all it's quirks intact, for flavor, rather than trying to rebuild it in 3e magic item rules.
EDIT: Yes, this has been updated to 3.5, at least as far as the latest update is concerned. I haven't checked it for completeness though. The 3.0 one had some gaps I had to fill for my ToEE campaign.