Converting an AD&D 2e 18 mage/18 thief/18 fighter

[MonkeySage]

into a 3.5 character...

My former step father would like to bring his character into my campaign, mainly to show my inexperienced players the finer points of teamwork. His character is a 2nd edition 18 mage/18 thief/18 fighter(or barbarian, i can't remember which).

I know that if I did this directly, he'd be epic level, maybe a deity of some sort.

What compromise can I come to so that his character does not seriously mess with the game. o.O

I should point out that while he has been playing 2e for 20 years, he does not know 3rd edition all that well.

[chaos_redefined]

Master Spellthief 1/Wizard 5/Unseen Seer 10/Abjurant Champion 5

Lacking in BAB and skill points, but gives him casting as a level 19 wizard. (Drop the level to match the level of the game.) This allows him to make up for the loss of BAB by buffing himself up. Not much I can do about the skill points though... Also, only has 4d6 sneak attack, but magic can change that.

It would be noticably easier if he was willing to drop 1 of the 3 classes. 3-way multiclassing is a lot less effective than it was in 2e.

[Firechanter]

May I ask how he ever got a triple-class 18/18/18 in the first place?

1. Humans can only Dual-Class. I'm not 100% sure but the name kinda implies you are limited to two classes. You'd also need insane stats to pull it off.
2. all other races have way lower level-caps. Usually between levels 11-15.
3. even ignoring those, the XP needed for Thief 18 will bump a triple-class only to Fighter 15 / Mage 14.
A Fighter 18 would bump Thief way beyond 20.
This is because each class uses wildly different level advancement tables.

--> the whole character looks pretty much illegal to me.

Either way the total XP required for 18/18/18 is over 7 million. Are you sure it would be clever to introduce such a character into your game?

--> just have him make a new character of your group's level.

[Phelix-Mu]

I'd honestly suggest he make a new character. Conversions from 2e to 3e are far from impossible, but they always involve a level of compromise that your former step father may not be able to appreciate until he has a feel for 3e. Once he has a grasp on the new way of things, let him decide if he wants to take the almost-inevitable power-docking that his old character will have in 3e (at least in any remotely balanced incarnation that is supposed to work with an existing party).

I speak from a perspective of having converted a number of characters from 2e to 3e, and, in general, you almost always lose stuff, and regaining it involves no small degree of optimization, most of which will be lost on someone that is new to 3e.

[Firechanter]

P.S.:
in addition to all of the above, that character is a near-epic party all by himself. What could he possibly show you about teamwork?

[TuggyNE]

My former step father would like to bring his character into my campaign, mainly to show my inexperienced players the finer points of teamwork. […] I should point out that while he has been playing 2e for 20 years, he does not know 3rd edition all that well.

Demonstrating the finer points of teamwork in an edition he doesn't know well is non-trivial, and may backfire. For that it might actually be more useful to do a one-shot or a few sessions in which you all play 2e together with high-level characters (possibly back-converted from 3.5, possibly not).

[Bullet06320]

im guessing an elven fighter/mage/thief
for simplicity making him fighter/wizard/rogue, but would make him a massively epic level character

or u could do a tristalt with the 3 classes, but depending on your group could also be problematic

or possible wizard3/rogue3/arcanetricksterX to make him even with the party
being new to 3rd, mite be a good option, keep it simple to start

[chaos_redefined]

May I ask how he ever got a triple-class 18/18/18 in the first place?

1. Humans can only Dual-Class. I'm not 100% sure but the name kinda implies you are limited to two classes. You'd also need insane stats to pull it off.
2. all other races have way lower level-caps. Usually between levels 11-15.
3. even ignoring those, the XP needed for Thief 18 will bump a triple-class only to Fighter 15 / Mage 14.
A Fighter 18 would bump Thief way beyond 20.
This is because each class uses wildly different level advancement tables.

--> the whole character looks pretty much illegal to me.

Either way the total XP required for 18/18/18 is over 7 million. Are you sure it would be clever to introduce such a character into your game?

--> just have him make a new character of your group's level.

Nah. Dual-classing worked that way in 2e, the thing that seems off is that he needs 1 more level in one of his classes to have access to the other two. Multiclass/Dual-class rules were weird.

[Hurnn]

May I ask how he ever got a triple-class 18/18/18 in the first place?

1. Humans can only Dual-Class. I'm not 100% sure but the name kinda implies you are limited to two classes. You'd also need insane stats to pull it off.
2. all other races have way lower level-caps. Usually between levels 11-15.
3. even ignoring those, the XP needed for Thief 18 will bump a triple-class only to Fighter 15 / Mage 14.
A Fighter 18 would bump Thief way beyond 20.
This is because each class uses wildly different level advancement tables.

--> the whole character looks pretty much illegal to me.

Either way the total XP required for 18/18/18 is over 7 million. Are you sure it would be clever to introduce such a character into your game?

--> just have him make a new character of your group's level.


I would guess he is actually dual classed (you can actually dual class up to 4 times) with 18 total levels assuming he is fairly even in levels across the 3 classes he should be about 10th-13th lvl with the conversion. Though for a dual class I wouldn't use their formula and instead divide every class level by 2 which gives you a more balanced version instead of one really high class and 2 crappy ones.

As far stats to pull that off in E2 you need a 15 and a pair of 17's not exactly earthshaking.

Anyway use the conversion book (use my formula) look at the character see if it ends up being a reasonable addition to your party ie: at least close to their level and power. Then show it to him and if he really wants to play him help him flesh out feats skills and spells would be my advice.

[MonkeySage]

I think i'll simply have to have him roll a new character. Seriously, some of the stuff we talked about had him giving me the wtf face... things like "Challenge rating", "Level Adjustment", and the distinction between sorcerer and wizard had him totally confused. Some of the questions he had, my answers only confused him further.

His character is a "halfling" in the 2e hobbit sense.

For reference, the rest of the party have an ECL of 3 each.

[Hurnn]

I think i'll simply have to have him roll a new character. Seriously, some of the stuff we talked about had him giving me the wtf face... things like "Challenge rating", "Level Adjustment", and the distinction between sorcerer and wizard had him totally confused. Some of the questions he had, my answers only confused him further.

His character is a "halfling" in the 2e hobbit sense.

Then yes something is wrong with 18 18 18 because the exp charts don't mesh, and halflings are capped at 9 for fighter, 15 in thief, and cant even be wizards.

[nedz]

Then yes something is wrong with 18 18 18 because the exp charts don't mesh, and halflings are capped at 9 for fighter, 15 in thief, and cant even be wizards.

Yes, the thief should be at least a level higher for multi-classed.

Maybe he meant Halfelf and not Halfling ? Or there are some old houserules involved — not uncommon ?

I've tried to build a F/M/T in 3.5 the trouble is
Fighter just equates to Feats, BAB and HP
Thief(Rogue) just equates to sneak+skills
Mage is just Wizard.
The closest you can get is a skill gish, perhaps using martial wizard for some fighter feats ?
Rogue 1 / Wizard 5 / followed by some combination of Abjurant Champion, Unseen Seer or even Arcane Trickster.
You would need to be Human for Able Learner to advance the skills, but that would break the character concept.

It would be better to create a new character I think.

[weckar]

Honestly, it seems to me your stepfather needs to learn the new game before he can teach the young'uns anything.
(Not to mention he sounds a tad condescending, but that may be me)

And by that I mean the 3.5/PF generation.
That's as new as shall be spoken of.

[Sewercop]

I think i'll simply have to have him roll a new character. Seriously, some of the stuff we talked about had him giving me the wtf face... things like "Challenge rating", "Level Adjustment", and the distinction between sorcerer and wizard had him totally confused. Some of the questions he had, my answers only confused him further.

His character is a "halfling" in the 2e hobbit sense.

For reference, the rest of the party have an ECL of 3 each.

You shouldn`t let someone that doesn`t understand the rules of ad&d after 20 years come in and teach someone in a game he has no clue about.
His character is illegal in so many ways.
Could you make a multiclassed monster in ad&d ? sure...
But not a halfling like that.

On the other hand, I suppose it would be tricky to call your former step dad out on the legality of his char.

[Firechanter]

My goodness. If the rest of the party is ECL 3, he gets an ECL3 character. End of story. No offense meant, but if someone wanted to join my game with a high-level character - and an illegal one at that - I'd think long and hard if I want them at my gaming table at all.

But let's not judge too harshly. Let him make a fresh level 3 character. Explain feats as "make your own Kit", and warn him that multiclassing Casters with other base classes doesn't work well, unless you are shooting for a Prestige Class and know what you are doing.

edit: damn you autocorrect!

[Der_DWSage]

Yeah. To those who are thinking this is an epic level AD&D char-it's close, and maybe scraping the equivalent of level 21 in 3e, but Multiclass rules in 2e were closer to Gestalt rules than to what we're familiar with.

[weckar]

It's like gestalt, yes, but you still need all the exp for every level. Granted, it's less, but certainly plus-epic.

[georgie_leech]

It's like gestalt, yes, but you still need all the exp for every level. Granted, it's less, but certainly plus-epic.

Actually, AD&D Level formulas scale differently than 3.5's "Current levelx1000 xp needed to level." Fighter 18 needs 2500000 (2.5 million), Thief 18 needs 2250000, and Mage needs 3000000; with 7750000 (7.75 million) xp, you have exactly 124 levels to play with.

[Drachasor]

Then yes something is wrong with 18 18 18 because the exp charts don't mesh, and halflings are capped at 9 for fighter, 15 in thief, and cant even be wizards.

To be fair, a lot of people tossed the level limits out the window. I am sure some ignored class restrictions and whatnot.

The experience bit is harder. Definitely "epic" in a 3E sense as after level 10 or so each class needed a fixed amount of experience for each further level (varied depending on class, Druids were different and that kicked in at level 15 and was awful). So getting multiple classes to level 18 takes a lot more experience than getting one class to level 25.

He could be dual classed and reincarnated as a halfling though.

Anyhow, it is insane he wants such a high-powered character when everyone else is just starting out. All he'll accomplish is making everyone else feel useless.

As an aside, I generally think the semi-gestalt multiclassing in 2E actually worked better for a lot of concepts than 3E. Gishes were a lot easier to make, for instance and didn't have the huge amount of time needed to get off the ground.

[Sewercop]

Actually, AD&D Level formulas scale differently than 3.5's "Current levelx1000 xp needed to level." Fighter 18 needs 2500000 (2.5 million), Thief 18 needs 2250000, and Mage needs 3000000; with 7750000 (7.75 million) xp, you have exactly 124 levels to play with.

Then explain how he is lvl 18 in all three classes?
It is an illegal character and should be treated that way.

[Drachasor]

Then explain how he is lvl 18 in all three classes?
It is an illegal character and should be treated that way.

Possibly a house rule. Hmm, or possibly experience-granting items. I remember a few of the latter, but none of the specifics. Pretty sure they could make different classes in a multiclass have different amounts of experience (and so could high ability scores). Rather curious what his ability scores were.

Or possibly he's just remembering his character wrong and it wasn't 18/18/18. Given a long span of time that's quite plausible too.

[Firechanter]

For those not familiar with AD&D2 advancement tables, here is a summary (with some meaningless statistics attached):
http://www.sisterworlds.com/olde/2e/xp.htm

So basically, for the first half of the game, the XP thresholds double at each level (for most classes). Then around level 10 you hit a "plateau" where the doubling stops and advancement becomes linear (e.g. "every 250.000XP").

On the other hand, the system hands out individual XP. Each character gets XP for doing the job prescribed by the class. Fighters get bonus XP for killing stuff, Wizards for casting spells, Thieves for disarming traps, and so on. And that's not a small gimmick, those bonuses can easily reach 30-50% of the standard XP.

For example, let's say a party of 4 around 4th level kills a 7th level Mage. The Mage as such is worth 2000XP (says so in the descrption). So everyone gets 500XP base. The party Mage gets (iirc) 100XP extra per spell he cast, the Thief gets 200XP for a Backstab, and the Fighter, provided he did most of the damage, gains 4x7x10 = 280XP for killing the finger-wiggler.

Multiclasses get full bonus XP for everything. For instance, I play a Gish and get XP for killing stuff with my sword as well as for casting spells.

[Sewercop]

Possibly a house rule. Hmm, or possibly experience-granting items. I remember a few of the latter, but none of the specifics. Pretty sure they could make different classes in a multiclass have different amounts of experience (and so could high ability scores). Rather curious what his ability scores were.

Or possibly he's just remembering his character wrong and it wasn't 18/18/18. Given a long span of time that's quite plausible too.

Yes you could have different amount of exp for the classes.
My guess is that he remembers wrong, got handed levels instead of exp,changing class, etc

My best guess are that its a dmpc.
And that he has no clue about ad&d rules.

[georgie_leech]

Then explain how he is lvl 18 in all three classes?
It is an illegal character and should be treated that way.

...I wasn't trying to explain how he got that result. My point was that if we accept the levels at face value, "Epic Levels" doesn't give any sense of the true scope; with an equivalent amount of xp, this guy has over 6 times the levels of an ordinary build. He could mastery every kind of spell casting in Core (Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer for spontaneous), any Full BAB class for the sake of iterative attacks, Rogue for skills, and still have a few levels left over.

OP, assuming that wires were crossed somewhere and what he actually had was a character that dabbled in skills, fighting, and magic (rather than... THAT), might I suggest Bard? It might be simpler to try and get a Bard to fight in Melee a little more than the AD&D Bard did then try and sort out what it is his old character could do.

[Der_DWSage]

...Is it wrong of me that I immediately went to a mental image of the bardic equivalent of a Care Bear who was trying to teach the D&D kids about friendship, fair play, and teamwork in destroying their enemies and seeing them mercilessly driven before them?

Barbarian Bear is here to teach you about Kobolds, Timmy! Hope you brought the BIG axe! (http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs46/f/2009/231/7/4/The_REAL_Care_Bear_by_0110100110.jpg)

[Seerow]

Even all of the rules considerations aside, I'm curious how a guy who by himself makes up 3/4 of a typical AD&D party is going to teach anybody anything about teamwork.

[Diarmuid]

Just to answer the OP a little.

There is an official WotC guide to converting 2nd edition to 3rd edition here: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/conversionbook.zip

By those guidelines, his character would have 30 levels to use to build by the 3.5 method to come as close to what he was as possible.

For multiclassed chars, take highest level, then 1/3 any other levels (rounded down) to build characters.

He can spread those levels however he wants, take prestige, etc.

[skyth]

For what it's worth, when 3.0 first came out, the official conversion for multiclasses was to take the highest class level and add 1/3 of the other class levels to get your total character level. So an 18/18/18 would be a level 30.

[OldTrees1]

The trick to 2e-3e conversions is to find a 3e base class that mimic some of the 2e mulitclassing.

I would go with a Beguiler (PHB II) / Rogue / (Rogue/Mage) Prestige Class (with dips in Warblade or Swordsage from ToB to enhance the Fighter feel). Switch out Advanced Learning for Eclectic Learning (Warmage Alternate Class Feature PHB II).

However make it clear that the character would be joining in at low level not at full strength. Suggest this as taking place before the grand adventure that got the character to triple 18s.

[KorbeltheReader]

I totally believe this character existed how he remembers it. 2e was a very different game, much more loosy-goosy and full of houserules and liberal application of rule 0. The rule books repeatedly encouraged players and DMs to come up with their own houserules and kits and whatnot.

And for everyone whining about breaking the level caps, demihuman level caps were the encumbrance rules of 2e. Nobody played them. The simplification of saving throws and disappearance of level caps/restricted classes were probably the greatest improvements in 3e.

Other posters are right that he's walking into a trap if he thinks he's going to march into 3.5 and show you a thing or two right off. WotC's version of D&D isn't just different rules; it's a whole different mindset. I would recommend y'all start a new game together, or at the very least have him create a new character of equivalent level to your party.

[Firechanter]

Yeah well, under that premise, you needn't bother trying to convert an illegal ("houseruled") 2e char into a legal 3e one. Just make up whatever numbers fill your heart with joy.

[Diarmuid]

And for everyone whining about breaking the level caps, demihuman level caps were the encumbrance rules of 2e. Nobody played them. The simplification of saving throws and disappearance of level caps/restricted classes were probably the greatest improvements in 3e.

People dont use the encumbrance rules? My groups certainly ignored the racial level caps and restrictions on multiclassing, but by george we make sure no one's toting around more crap than they're supposed to.

[Darrin]

It is an illegal character and should be treated that way.

AD&D was 90% cobbled-together "official" houserules and 150% really-badly-thought-out houserules slapped together and kitbashed as needed. 2nd Edition put a shiny new paint job on a lot of it, but underneath the hood it was still a hodgepodge engine. "Legal" was whatever worked for your group, and whatever your DM let you get away with.

Even in 3rd edition, once you get up above 20th level, the wheels just fall off and you're basically playing a big game of "Oh yeah? Because I said so!"

In 3rd, there's probably several ways an 18th level wizard could wind up with the class abilities of an 18th level thief and a 18th level fighter. Maybe something with polymorph/shapechange into a mindflayer/illithid savant, or ice assassin/astral seed/psychic reformation/aleax shenanigans.

I guess what I'm trying to say is "legal" isn't really a boolean property in D&D.

[Mitchellnotes]

I think what may be more important here than "converting" his character would be determing what he wants his character to be able to do. Does he want to gish with some rogueyness, be a combat capable rogue/mage or be a very survivable wizard? Build the character around what he wants it to be able to do. If he truly wants to be all-purpose, maybe straight factotum or chameleon could be a way to go?

[HaikenEdge]

From the sound of the OP, it sounds like he wants to step in, flaunt his stuff, overshadow the party and then laugh at how incompetent the rest of the party is, in the guise of being a mentor.

No D&D 3.5 party needs a mentor as a PC; the idea is absurd because it imbalances the entire game. It'd be like having one (nonmundane) PC out of four PCs that was five levels ahead; the single PC would be so far ahead of the curve, there'd be no need for teamwork, because he'd make all the CR appropriate encounters for the other party members trivial, and any CR appropriate encounters for that character too dangerous for the lower level PCs to be involved in.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

In 3rd, there's probably several ways an 18th level wizard could wind up with the class abilities of an 18th level thief and a 18th level fighter. Maybe something with polymorph/shapechange into a mindflayer/illithid savant, or ice assassin/astral seed/psychic reformation/aleax shenanigans.

I guess what I'm trying to say is "legal" isn't really a boolean property in D&D.

That or ffusion and asttral seed shenanigans.


Adding to the discussion, I say send him here so he can get some explanations and help in building a 3.5 character at ECL 3. There is no good reason to bring in someone 6 times the party's level.

[Jeff the Green]

Yeah, this isn't going to work. The problem is not that this combo can't be converted (personally I'd say "factotum 20" and call it a day) but that in 3.5 teamwork can't be taught, particularly by someone that doesn't know the rules. It's too complex:
Party role is not defined by class but by build. Your blaster can be a warmage or a barbarian, your trapmonkey a beguiler, rogue, or cleric, and your BFC a wizard, druid, or psion. A wizard or cleric can do anything, and even a number of classes that seem pigeonholed can play surprisingly against type, especially once PrCs are in play. And since each build has its own take on its possible roles, each party has to develop its own SOPs.
Buffs are king. Mundanes cannot compete without buffs, and there are a number of roles casters can't play without them too. Plus, because of the former point, each combo of buffer and buffee is going to have its own preferred strategies.
Apparently necessary roles aren't. Case in point, healer. A beguiler with a wand is a far better use of space than a cleric who spends his slots healing. Similarly, tank, DPR, and skillmonkey can all be replaced with the appropriate combinations of feats, spells, and class features.
Apparently small differences in classes drastically change how they play. A sorcerer and a wizard play more differently than a wizard and a wu jen, despite sharing a spell list.
Giant changes in classes can produce similar playstyles. A ranger plays quite similarly to certain cleric builds. Likewise druids and barbarians or sorcerers and favored souls.
Admittedly, I don't know much about AD&D, but I'm pretty sure at least several of these weren't true then.

So unless your ex-stepfather just needs to smack your players upside the head and say "don't shoot the BBEG while the druid's grappling him" or "consider your allies when choosing your spells," he's not actually going to manage to teach them anything.

[Mr Adventurer]

Everyone shut up!

He's a Factotum.

;)

[HaikenEdge]

Everyone shut up!

He's a Factotum.

;)

Factotums don't cast spells.

[Siosilvar]

Factotums don't cast spells.

"By spending 1 inspiration point, you can mimic a spell as a spell-like ability."

Close enough.