D&D 3.5 + Call of Cthulhu?

[Xuldarinar]

Just a point of curiosity, as to how well D20 Call of Cthulhu mixes with standard D&D 3.5 content. For instance, could a player take the investigator class (Essentially the only choice in CoC is Human Investigator) but operate in a campaign along side standard 3.5 classes? Im aware the content is made to work together, but how well?

[Bogardan_Mage]

The "investigator class" as you call it is pretty weak compared to D&D classes; it's essentially the Expert NPC class (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/expert.htm) with two more skill points (and some variability with BAB and Saves). That said, the D&D classes aren't tremendously well balanced against themselves so it probably wouldn't be a huge issue if you've got a low level of optimisation. Do keep in mind that d20 Cthulhu is based on 3.0 so a number of the skills are different/don't exist.

[some guy]

I would guess that if you'd remove the magic system from 3.5 and the caster classes, import the magic system from CoC d20 and made a rule that the "investigator class" would lose lose a bit less Sanity when casting spells it might be more comparable.

[Ashtagon]

ymmv

If you want to play with a Lovecraftian feel in terms of PC:monster relative power, you can't really let the PCs play anything higher than a tier 6 class, and certainly nothing that has access to conventional D&D magic.

Most of the CoC spells were D&D spells with the per day usage limit replaced by a (essentially per lifetime) Sanity loss mechanic. It should be fairly easy to convert in either direction, and the SRD even has notes on how to do this.

Conversely, the investigator class has n real place in a conventional D&D campaign, any more than the commoner or expert do.

Monsters are generally convertible freely between the two.

WotC's CoC was a 3.0 era product, so bear this in mind if attempting a conversion.

Finally, these (http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=9839) are my notes on playing CoC using d20 Modern rules.

[Xuldarinar]

Hmm. Lets say one wanted to take the feel of CoC into a fantasy setting. So limit classes to low tiers, meaning mostly NPC classes, ban spellcasting classes or at least strip them of casting, convert spellcasting to CoC's system. Would you recommend using HoH at all (Most likely excluding taint), or just draw most of the flavor elements exclusively from CoC (With or without conversions on a case by case basis)?

[Ashtagon]

If I were to do CoC using 3.5 rules?

I'd insist on the following:


All PCs are human. The bonus feat may only be spent on a "skill bonus" feat.
Tier 5 or tier 6 classes only. No classes that have spell-casting or other "powers" abilities either. No prestige classes. NPCs have free rein to break these limits regarding tiers and prestige classes (but not spells/powers). That limits it to the following:
aristocrat, warrior, commoner, expert, fighter, CW swashbuckler, PHB2 knight
Use the sanity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/sanity.htm) rules. Anyone can cast a spell, but it costs sanity points (which are essentially a per-lifetime resource).
Alternatively, use the taint (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/taint.htm) rules. Spells cause depravity damage equal to the spell level; a (DC 10 + spell level) Will save halves the depravity damage (round down). Note that there are essentially no magical means to reduce this depravity damage, making it a much riskier proposition than with the sanity rules.
In addition to either the sanity or the taint rules, spells should cause ability damage when cast. This should broadly match the amounts used for BoVD/BoED for the special spells listed in those books.
Massive damage threshold needs revising. I suggest a base of Constitution score + HD, plus the same again for each size class over Medium, or -1 for each size class below Medium (down to a minimum of half the base "Medium" value).


The add-on rules in HoH for fear etc. are excellent. The taint rules are good too, but given the lack of magical means to cleanse taint, may actually be too severe to be useful; at least sanity can be restored with psychotheapy (Heal skill in SRD version of sanity).

I'm less happy about the monster selection in HoH, as it tends towards the bogeyman "boo" encounter, rather than the existential horror that is the trademark of Lovecraft. Elder Evils probably has better support for a CoC-style campaign in that regard.

[Xuldarinar]

Those rules sound reasonable and could result in a fun and challenging campaign. Obviously it would depend on a strong DM, and good players, but thats normal.