Mixing D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder: Ditching CMB and CMD, advice needed.

[Deadkitten]

So my "Forever DM" has been wanting to settle on a comprehensive set of houserules to combine both 3.5 and Pathfinder in our games. We ourselves have managed to find simple answers to most of the conversions but one thing stands out and is giving us problems:

WE ALL HATE CMB AND CMD With a fiery passion.

The issue is that it seems that CMB is so intrinsic to how pathfinder works that a large number of classes have bonuses to or against it.

Some classes and archetypes are really fun, but have abilities that work off of CMB.

A good example of an ability we would love to convert is the Spell Sunder Rage Power

I guess my question is: Does anybody have any advice on how to ditch CMB abilities without just stripping class features away?

[CrazyNoob]

Simple things is to ignore the CMB/CMD functionality of PF.

If a class gives a bonus to CMB/CMD. give the same bonus to BullRush, Disarm, Overrun, trip or defense against the same list.

In the event your using monsters from PF, you can either back calculate the values from CMD/CMD, or use the 3.x combat rules to determine what the oppose check values are.

As a DM i like to use the CMB/CMD without the BAB component for creatures/encounters and have the PCs actually roll the standard 3.x checks. Typically creatures will have a 50-70% success.


CMB = BAB+STR+Size Mod vs CMD = 10+BAB+STR+DEX+Size Mod.
3.X
Bull Rush = StrCheck(Assumes Creature Size) vs STRCheck(assumes creature size)
Disarm = Attackroll+/-Weapon Size(assumes size taken into account) vs Attackroll (assumes size taken into account)+/-Weapon size (Assumes creature Size)
Overrun/Trip = STRCheck(Assumes creature size) vs STR or DEXCheck+/- #of Legs (Assumes creature size)

[Beheld]

Yeah, the obvious answer is to just play 3.5, and if something gives a bonus to those, just have it be a bonus to all the maneuvers.

[Deadkitten]

How would you guys port over things such as the spell sunder rage power, which has unique rules that dont really exist in 3.5

[Beheld]

How would you guys port over things such as the spell sunder rage power, which has unique rules that dont really exist in 3.5

I would say that he casts Greater Dispel Magic with his mighty swordstrike at Caster level = to his character level +X where X is whatever number makes it work as often as you think it should.

[D.M.Hentchel]

Well a Sunder Attack uses the same bonuses in 3.5 as pathfinder, so for spells
Sunder check (BAB + Str [dex] +/- Size of weapon +/- Size of creature) against DC 15 + CL

For a spell on a creature though
It is a Sunder check (see above) vs. a sunder check (see above) +5.

[CasualViking]

Trip and grapple, the combat maneuvers that matter in 3.5, both require a touch attack and an opposed str check. Should the bonus apply to one or both?

Anyways, the real question is the huge difference in size bonus. Big 3.5 monsters with reach and grab will completely ruin your ****, whereas the same PF monster has a decent chance of failing if you're a decently martial type.

[D.M.Hentchel]

The Improved _________ feats only apply to the Str/Grapple check, so typically that is where the bonus should go.

[Segev]

Out of curiosity - and not faulting you at all - what are your group's reasons for loathing CMB/CMD so much?

[Deadkitten]

Out of curiosity - and not faulting you at all - what are your group's reasons for loathing CMB/CMD so much?

It pretty much comes down to we prefer 3.5 rules for things over pathfinders. My DM far more frequently pulls from 3.5 for his encounters cause that is what he is more familair with.

However, our group does want to include pathfinder in our games cause we collectively enjoy that it enables concepts that are far easier to achieve than in 3.5.

We have been meaning to sit down as a group and determine a default system for how we mix the two, but we have yet to do so currently.

But, yea its basically cause we just dont like it and we primarily use 3.5 and it can get somewhat when someone does use pathfinder stuff that involves it somewhat.

[Elder_Basilisk]

Out of curiosity - and not faulting you at all - what are your group's reasons for loathing CMB/CMD so much?

I'm not the OP or in his group, but I dislike CMB/CMD because I prefer the 3.5 version of combat maneuvers other than grapple (3.5 grapple should just be an opposed attack roll with special modifiers rather than a special check where it is unclear what miscellaneous bonuses apply). One aspect of the 3.5 checks that I like is that combat maneuvers can be an equalizer between large groups of weaker monsters and higher level heroes. A group of town guards with ranseurs have a decent chance of disarming Lord High and Mighty the tenth level. A group of ordinary hobgoblins with guisarmes can probably trip Lord High Mighty. By design, the CMB/CMD mechanism in pathfinder makes it much more difficult for the guard or hobgoblins to threaten Lord High and Mighty. Supposedly it was also going to fix the "don't bother trying combat maneuvers past tenth level" aspect of the game where scaling size bonuses, etc make it difficult to grapple, trip or otherwise use combat maneuvers in 3.5, but that didn't really happen. It's still a "don't bother" situation unless you are really specialized (just like it was in 3.5). Also, combat maneuvers in pathfinder are in the same "special mechanics" area as grapple was in 3.5. Does bless apply? Does flanking? When can you apply weapon focus? It's as clear as it was in 3.5 with grapple which is to say, not clear at all. The other combat maneuvers had clear rules. Disarm: Opposed attack roll. Apply them all. Trip: Apply them all to the touch attack. Apply only ability check modifiers to the strength check. Etc.