PDA

View Full Version : Does BoVD require updating to work in 3.5?



KillianHawkeye
2008-04-11, 07:03 AM
And if so, can anybody provide a link to the list of updates/changes?

I'm not too familiar with this book, but one of my players wants to use it. (He's not Evil, just a Necromancer.) Since I've been considering making a couple NPCs with BoED, I'd like to allow it. So can anybody who's used it in their games give me their opinions on what works and what doesn't? What do you think should be allowed, and what shouldn't? What, if anything, needs changing?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-04-11, 07:11 AM
I'm pretty sure it was written for 3.5.

RTGoodman
2008-04-11, 07:12 AM
I don't own a copy of BoVD, but I think it was one of the ones that came out pretty close to 3.5 and probably doesn't need that much changing. Probably just updating any DR stuff (DR/magic instead of DR/+1 and such) and maybe a few other things.

There's some neat stuff in it, but I usually wouldn't allow it in a non-Evil game (since even neutral characters are gonna not be in favor of the torture and whatnot), but if you, as the DM, give the OK to whatever he uses, it should be fine.

Kesnit
2008-04-11, 07:21 AM
BoVD is 3.5, and is (IMO) a lot more balanced than BoED. I would recommend checking out anything your player wants to use, just in case.

BTW, all the spells in BoVD are Evil, meaning the Necromancer would eventually turn Evil from casting them. Make sure the player knows that and is willing to go down that route.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-04-11, 07:25 AM
BoVD has Expertise instead of Combat Expertise, Wilderness Lore, DR X/+Y, and so on. 3.0 book. Updating required is minimal, though, and mostly obvious. It's pretty much limited to, uh, replacing Wilderness Lore with Survival, and DR X/+Y with DR X/material.

And yeah, using material from the BoVD would either require you to be evil or cause you to be evil soon enough. Just the material components of some spells are evil.

Bag_of_Holding
2008-04-11, 07:27 AM
There are a few things that need to be fixed such as stacking critical multiplier/threat range of a certain PrC etc. The hivemind aspect of Dark Speech (which is one of the major abuses in the sourcebook) had been updated to a short-duration version of Suggestion in 3.5, for example.

KillianHawkeye
2008-04-11, 07:34 AM
Yeah, I was pretty sure it was a 3.0 book (or just before 3.5 anyway).

Since the character in question is a Wizard, do any of the spells in the book require alteration for 3.5 usage? And really, are ALL the spells in the book Evil? I guess I will have to look through them all to see which ones I will allow...

Bag_of_Holding
2008-04-11, 07:36 AM
Yeah, I was pretty sure it was a 3.0 book (or just before 3.5 anyway).

Since the character in question is a Wizard, do any of the spells in the book require alteration for 3.5 usage? And really, are ALL the spells in the book Evil? I guess I will have to look through them all to see which ones I will allow...

No, there are some non-evil spells in there although they are nonetheless creepy .

Nerd-o-rama
2008-04-11, 10:08 AM
There are a few things that need to be fixed such as stacking critical multiplier/threat range of a certain PrC etc.No they don't!

*huggles his Fist of Raziel*

Although actually, that's a) from the BoED and b) a critical confirmation ability that stacks threat-range extenders (basically, Bless Weapon whenever you smite), so it's not as bad as stacking threat-range extenders.

ChaosDefender24
2008-04-11, 06:13 PM
There are a few things that need to be fixed such as stacking critical multiplier/threat range of a certain PrC etc.
:)
http://www.kieranyanner.com/interior/101502-Dispater.jpg

hamishspence
2008-04-12, 09:30 AM
currently, an official update doesn't exist, as far as I know. So, simplest way is go over things you know need changing (skills, DR bonuses) Then look at spells.

KillianHawkeye
2008-04-12, 09:55 AM
Eh, I was kinda hoping there was an official 3.5 update for it, or someone else had already gone to the trouble for it. Guess I'll just do it myself then. Thanks, all!

hamishspence
2008-04-12, 10:28 AM
not sure what best replacements for skills like Innuendo, Intiut Direction, etc are. Maybe Knowledge (dungeoneering). Or if you want more power, see what skills a powerful character should have, that the archfiends don't. Depends how clunky it would be.

DR/6+ should probably be at least silver+good, maybe epic+good, for devils. FC2's Aspect of Asmodeus, weaker than the real thing, has epic/good, as des aspect of Mephistopheles.
DR/7+ could be silver+epic+good, to go along with corresponding boosts in late model demon lords.

Dragon magazine gave the high level demon lords DR/epic+good+cold iron. FC1 also recommends adding DR/epic to the usual DR/cold iron + good. MAybe the weakest (Yeenoghu, Jubilex) should not have DR epic, since their CRs are very close to those of their Aspects as statted in FC1.

RTGoodman
2008-04-12, 05:49 PM
Innuendo is now a part of Bluff, and Intuit Direction is now part of Survival (I believe).

For the DR stuff, I don't think BoVD has an official update, but if I remember correctly the general update for the MM or something like that had conversion stuff for the various DRs. If you can find the update booklet/PDF thing, that should help.

Agrippa
2008-04-12, 07:12 PM
BTW, all the spells in BoVD are Evil, meaning the Necromancer would eventually turn Evil from casting them. Make sure the player knows that and is willing to go down that route.

Except for preserve organ.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-04-12, 07:14 PM
Tell me the original purpose was not THAT one. I can see why 3.0 had Innuendo.

Agrippa
2008-04-12, 07:57 PM
Tell me the original purpose was not THAT one. I can see why 3.0 had Innuendo.

You really do have a dirty mind Azerian. Imagine the good that spell could be used for. Removing a damaged heart, liver or kidney from a patient while keeping the patient alive (using another spell of course), preserving the organ while repairing it (two spells including preserve organ) and then placing the heart, liver or kidney back into the patient's body (maybe using a fourth spell). The spell could also be used for organ transplants or during a heart bypass surgery. A played a Chaotic Good necromancer with preserve organ as a spell in addition to arcane healing. The rest of the party, well the cleric of Pelor was an idiot who hated rocks, the ranger was a violent paranoid, the druid was a coward and the party fighter was a Neutral Evil con man with Lawful Neutral on his character sheet. Only the party barbarian actually had any respect for or gave any help to my character.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-04-12, 08:03 PM
Why do you think that spell made it to BoVD and not to BoED? 'Cause it causes 20d6+10 IRL Integrity damage just by hearing of it.

Plus, Regeneration makes it meaningless, which is the reason THAT sprang to mind.

Agrippa
2008-04-12, 08:17 PM
Why do you think that spell made it to BoVD and not to BoED? 'Cause it causes 20d6+10 IRL Integrity damage just by hearing of it.

That didn't happen to me. My thoughts were, "Hm, this might be good for transplanting internal organs." The squicky part only came about because of your reactions to the spell's name. Doesn't sound all that gross or sexual to me.


Plus, Regeneration makes it meaningless, which is the reason THAT sprang to mind.

For one, that's a divine spell, right? Second, if given the choice our party's cleric would rather smash rocks than cast any spell, healing or other wise for his or the party's benefit. Second, the druid was a coward, if he saw one of his fellow party members lying on the ground, wounded, while the enemy was near by, he'd take that as his cue to run away. Third, the fighter would probably sell his fellow party members' healing potions, if he though he could make a profit, prompting the barbarian to attempt to kill him.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-04-12, 08:26 PM
Or, of course, any spell that can be metamagicked to have the [positive] subtype. Effectively the same, and anything with a duration of one minute or higher will most certainly stop death.

PS: Ouch. Doesn't sound like a nice party. You should consider getting helms of opposite alignment.

Agrippa
2008-04-12, 09:14 PM
PS: Ouch. Doesn't sound like a nice party. You should consider getting helms of opposite alignment.

Wouldn't work. The cleric was Neutral Good, the druid was True Neutral, the Ranger was Chaotic Good (I'll explain later) and the fighter was listed as Lawful Neutral. The Chaotic Neutral barbarian was sort of like Han Solo with the ability to fly into a bloodthirsty rage when needed. My necromancer and the barbarian were the two sanest, most honest and law-abiding party members.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-04-12, 09:20 PM
Aaah, I understand.

They're playing with the variant that has Deceive Alignment and Justify In Half Baked Ways, right?

Maerok
2008-04-13, 12:34 AM
Can BoVD prestige classes stand up to others with the higher than average spellcasting losses?

Agrippa
2008-04-13, 05:49 PM
Aaah, I understand.

They're playing with the variant that has Deceive Alignment and Justify In Half Baked Ways, right?

Except for the barbarian and the necromancer. Though someone on Dicefreaks, I think it was Myth Mage, told me that my necromancer sounded more Neutral than Chaotic.

Doctor Edward Philips: A Chaotic Good human necromancer wizard played by me. I convinced the DM to add some healing spells to his list under the Necromancy school. Hit the party fighter with a chill touch to try to stop him from killing a non-threatening lunar moth.

party fighter (can't remeber his name): Think of a combination of Eddie (from Ed, Edd & Eddie), Edmund Blackadder and Zapp Branigan with just a hint of Milo Menderbender. He kept a pair of robes and holy symbol of each major religion so he could con them out of all their money. His alignment was Lawful Neutral (I'd say he had at least tendancies towards Evil). He pushed my character out of the way and slaughtered the innocent lunar moth. Then he cut off the wings, hid the body, seathed his sword then walked off as if nothing happened. He also is trying to convince a small rural town that its founder is a vampire so he could bilk them out of their money.

party cleric of Pelor with ADHD: He was a human cleric of Pelor and former friend of the party necromancer (me). I say former friend because he attacked the stone altar instead of defending the lunar moth. Why did he attack the altar? Were the temple priests Evil? No, he just wanted to smash something.

party barbarian/ranger: Didn't like me at the start. How was I supposed to know he wouldn't like the idea of me putting his pet dog in a zoo? That said he sided with me in the fight with the party fighter. But only in spirit. Listed alignment Chaotic Good. Probably Chaotic Neutral.

second party barbarian: He actually got along with the party necromancer thinking him to be one of the few non-idiots in the party. He also came up with rather sane and intelligent battle tactics for the party. Sadly, the party fighter/leader preferred to use his own "tactics" instead. These were mostly comprised of dirty tricks, attempted bribery and using the rest of the party as his own personal meat shield/cannon fodder. Some times he did this all at once.

party druid: Friendly to me at the start, Neutral Good and with a bison instead of a dog. Otherwise, see barbarian.