I have yet to play a Pathfinder game but have looked at the core book off an on.
What I can't seem to find a solid answer on is how dificult it is to use the pathfinder core book and older setting books.
Is there an amount of conversion that /has/ to be for, say, scarred lands, or can I just stick with the classes in the pathfinder book grab my old scarred lands books and go.
From what little I've gathered the monsters may not be as tough as they used to be but I'm kinda ok with that. Is there anything else with an older setting book that absolutely has to be tinkered with to work properly?
Thanks for any input.
Go here for a detailed conversion document from 3.5 to Pathfinder. It also points out some important differences which one should be aware of between the two versions of D+D.
Be careful with introducing any spells from Scarred Lands books. You will have to judge each spell individually against spells from Pathfinder. Rituals should probably be used only as story devices, but they could be make workable with some work. The same might go for any items from old books.
That depends on the setting, but by and large most stat-blocks for NPCs are unaffected save by the addition of a few feats here and there. Monsters are more problematic, especially undead, but generally what they gain on one hand they lose on the other and the players don't need to know that you are winging it.
The settings I love myself are Ravenloft and Eberron, both excellent backgrounds but neither in Pathfinder, but on the whole the systems are close enough not to cause any great grief.
Thank you very much for the input!
Go here for a detailed conversion document from 3.5 to Pathfinder. It also points out some important differences which one should be aware of between the two versions of D+D.
Fixed the link for the conversion document from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
Go here for a detailed conversion document from 3.5 to Pathfinder. It also points out some important differences which one should be aware of between the two versions of D+D.
This should work now: 3.5 to PF conversion document here (along with other useful stuff).
This reminds me, I need to pick up a PDF copy of the Polyhedron issue with the d20 Spelljammer setting in it.
It's not exactly the most faithful conversion of Spelljammer from the original 2e setting. On the other hand, I think that its a good start upon which to build further.
It's not exactly the most faithful conversion of Spelljammer from the original 2e setting. On the other hand, I think that its a good start upon which to build further.
Honestly, that it's not a completely faithful adaption is its strongest point IMHO. While I loved the basic idea of wooden ships in space, I despised the entire Ptolemaic crystal spheres thing. It really had me pounding my head against the wall.
Reducing things to a single solar system and bringing things back to Newton vastly improves the setting.
I alway looked at the Ptolemaic crystal spheres .... as just stars inside a giant gas nebula. The creators just made the sphere to protect the stars from the gases inside the nebula. Travel far enough away, and you leave the nebula, and are in empty space (between galaxies).
Anyway that was how i all ways reasoned it out as :)
That depends on the setting, but by and large most stat-blocks for NPCs are unaffected save by the addition of a few feats here and there. Monsters are more problematic, especially undead, but generally what they gain on one hand they lose on the other and the players don't need to know that you are winging it.
The settings I love myself are Ravenloft and Eberron, both excellent backgrounds but neither in Pathfinder, but on the whole the systems are close enough not to cause any great grief.
A guy over on Fraternity of Shadows has done a detailed Ravenloft conversion. Just thought I'd let you know.
It's not exactly the most faithful conversion of Spelljammer from the original 2e setting. On the other hand, I think that its a good start upon which to build further.Honestly, that it's not a completely faithful adaption is its strongest point IMHO. While I loved the basic idea of wooden ships in space, I despised the entire Ptolemaic crystal spheres thing. It really had me pounding my head against the wall.
Reducing things to a single solar system and bringing things back to Newton vastly improves the setting.
I always thought of the Phlogiston as being akin to Hyperspace, as used in most sci-fi settings. Having the shell around a system was just a means of dividing the systems.