Pathfinder and Ravenloft

[HyperionSol]

I've been collecting Pathfinder 2E manuals, mostly as an alternative to D&D. I have been dabbling a bit of putting together a Pathfinder adventure set in Ravenloft. I have only a few ideas and such, but I do need to ask for some help. Is anyone here in the fraternity who has experience with Pathfinder 2E? If so I need to ask two major questions.

1: If you have experience with both 5E and P2E, do you have any tips to translate statblocks from D&D 5E to Pathfinder 2E?

AND/OR

2: If you know Pathfinder 1E, do you have a better idea of translating P1E monsters to P2E?

I'm asking because I've tried looking up ways to transfer monsters from either edition to P2E but it's always vague and to me reads more like 'Just use something similar' but I can't really do that when it comes to the Darklords and some of the monsters unique to Ravenloft.

P.S. If you have advice to translate D&D 2e (Where the Ravenloft Monstrous Compendiums and the best lore manuals came to be) to P2E instead, I'll take that advice too.

[Mistmaster]

I'm sticking to first edition.

[Wolfglide of the Fraternity]

I'm certainly interested in PF2E, though I have no practical experience yet.

If you are collecting the manuals, then you may have already seen the short blurb in the Gamemastery Guide about converting creatures from 1st edition: https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=995

Converting First Edition Creatures
If you’re converting creatures from First Edition, you won’t find a direct numerical conversion. Instead, use the original statistics to create your road map, giving a better AC to a creature that had a good AC in First Edition, and so on.

Here are the main areas of difference that you’ll want to keep in mind for your conversion.

• Ability modifiers scale differently, so don’t copy them over exactly. The highest modifiers tend not to get as high in Second Edition. You’ll rarely see a +10 Strength modifier, for example. Creatures also tend to get better low statistics at higher levels than they used to, particularly for Dexterity and Wisdom. This is most evident in high‑level First Edition creatures with awful Dexterity.
• Low-Intelligence creatures, particularly animals, tend to have more special actions than they would have in First Edition. This is to make encounters with them more dynamic and distinct. Compare dinosaurs between the editions for good examples.
• When converting spell-like abilities to innate spells, you might need to make some substitutions. Some spells will appear as heightened versions of spells (such as greater dispel magic now being heightened dispel magic), but others will require you to find something different. Also, don’t feel like you need to keep every spell; focus on the most thematic and potent ones. The Spells section on page 65 has more advice on this subject.
• Damage reduction has been replaced with two options: resistance to all damage (possibly with exceptions), or more HP and a weakness. Immunities, Weaknesses, and Resistances on page 63 describes the distinction.
• If you want to convert spell resistance, you can give the creature a +1 status bonus to all saves against magic, or +2 if it had abnormally high spell resistance for its level.

That is not a cut-and-dried method of conversion, and it doesn't sound like the developers have one. There may yet be third parties who have thought of stricter guidelines for this, though I imagine they might not work all the time.

[WolfKook]

Well, I'm not by any means an expert in PF2e, but I love tinkering with systems and in the past year I've been getting myself familiar with the PF2e rules (Though I've never GM'd in this system). I'm currently starting a Ravenloft campaign and after balancing several systems (Including Chronicles of Darkness, Basic Roleplaying and Savage Worlds), I've decided on running it on PF2e.

So far, I've taken the following decisions:

• I will be using the Proficiency without Level variant from the Gamemastery Guide to create a more grim and gritty feel.

• I've also ruled out nonhuman ancestries, but have encouraged my players to choose heritages such as Changeling (Hexblood), Dhampir, Duskwalker (Reborn) and Reflection. I've also reskinned the Halfling ancestry as the Booged (Creepy children) heritage; the Half-Elf and Half-Orc heritages as Fey-born and Caliban, respectively; and I'm in the process of creating a Half-Vistani heritage.

• I will also be using several variant rules on alignment, such as No Alignment and Moral Intentions

I haven't gone to specific conversions yet, but I found this document in the Paizo site that could be useful in translating from PF1e/D&D3.5e to PF2e. I've also found this online tool to make some other conversions.

Sadly, the first document specifically says that the conversion is not very straightforward, and probably you and I will have to do some tinkering to achieve a real conversion. For the most part, I'd recommend to use PF2e statblocks as a replacement for D&D statblocks when applicable, but sometimes we will have to adjust some stats or elements from the rules. If you want, we can keep in touch to help each other on each particular conversion, if you're interested.

[Rebel Mage]

• I will be using the Proficiency without Level variant from the Gamemastery Guide to create a more grim and gritty feel.

If I go do PF2e stuff, I feel like I'd go for this as well. Also because I prefer the smaller numbers, because I'm used to it in 5e. And it just... feels better to me.
There's also a rule, I forget what it's called, that serves to give bonuses so you don't have to give magic items. I'd probably also use that.
I've only ever played two sessions of PF2e, though. I do have the beginner box, but can't buy the Foundry module for it because Paizo's site only accepts credit cards...

[Wolfglide of the Fraternity]

Sadly, the first document specifically says that the conversion is not very straightforward, and probably you and I will have to do some tinkering to achieve a real conversion. For the most part, I'd recommend to use PF2e statblocks as a replacement for D&D statblocks when applicable, but sometimes we will have to adjust some stats or elements from the rules. If you want, we can keep in touch to help each other on each particular conversion, if you're interested.

Feel free to keep me in the loop; I am certainly interested in how the conversions go. I'm not sure how much help I will be in the near future, but eventually work will calm down.

[Ryan Naylor]

While you *can* make NPCs in the same way as PCs in PF2, the best option is to create them from scratch with statistics equivalent to monsters at the level you want. PF2 explicitly takes out the simulationist expectation that PCs and NPCs follow the same rules.

The good aspect of this is that the only major decisions you need to make are what special abilities they have (which, if you're using established characters or monsters, are pretty well established), and how many actions they cost.

[Wolfglide of the Fraternity]

PF2 explicitly takes out the simulationist expectation that PCs and NPCs follow the same rules.

I liked that expectation in D&D 3.5, at least in part since it made monsters seem more accessible as characters, even if some were still infeasible. The structure also helped with keeping some standardization in design decisions. Unfortunately, it is probably also why it takes me so long to write statistics blocks, and I may use it like a crutch to avoid the more nebulous realm of monster design.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I like how Numenera does monsters asymmetrically from PCs. At the simplest level, all you need is a number to represent how challenging it is, and the rules cover it from there. Everything else is flavor text or minor mechanical alterations to represent special abilities and aptitudes.

I also feel comfortable with making monsters in Call of Cthulhu, since there almost isn't any balance to worry about disrupting.

[Rebel Mage]

I also feel comfortable with making monsters in Call of Cthulhu, since there almost isn't any balance to worry about disrupting.

This comment literally made me give out a very unflattering squeal of laughter.

[WolfKook]

Well, to answer your question, I'll start with the darklords in VRGtR. As controversial as they are in these forums, most of them have a suggested monster or NPC template, that would probably translate seamlessly to PF2e rules. As they are darklords, I'd probably go with the elite version of each monster, and make some tweaks and adjustments to make them closer to their particular concept (For instance, including the poison theme for Ivana Boritsi).

So, after an (admittedly) quick search, here are the the templates I would start with:

Ankhtepot would be an Elite Cursed King Mummy (CL 11)
Arijani would be an Elite Raja Rakshasa (CL 11)
Chakuna would be an Elite Weretiger (CL 5)
Harkon Lukas would be an Elite Werewolf (CL 4)
Hazlan would be an Elite Mage of Many Styles (CL 14)
Ivan Dilisnya would be an Elite Noble (CL 4)
Ivana Boritsi would be an Elite Spy (CL 7)
Jacqueline Renier would be an Elite Wererat (CL 3)
Mother Lorinda would be an Elite Green Hag (CL 5)
Baron Metus would be an Elite Vampire Count (CL 6)
Saidra D'Honaire would be an Elite Wraith (CL 7)
Strahd von Zarovich would be an Elite Vampire Mastermind (CL 10)
Madame Talisveri Eris would be a normal Noble (CL 3)
Viktra Mordenheim would be an Elite Reckless Scientist (CL 7)
Vladeska Drakov would be an Elite Captain of the Guard (CL 7)
Lord Wilfred Godefroy would be an Elite Ghost Commoner (CL 5)

Darcalus Rex, The God-Brain, Isolde, Ramya, Reeva and Tsien Chiang would be a little more difficult to pull out, as I don't see direct parallels with PF2e monsters...

Hope this helps.

[WolfKook]

Quick question on this topic... As I'm starting my campaign in PF2, I would probably be taking notes, making conversions and otherwise adapting the setting to the rules. I guess I would have no qualms to share my notes with anyone interested on looking at them, or on adding their own.

Perhaps with time it could become sort of a "Ravenloft PF2 conversion", as this site has done on PF1 and Savage Worlds.

[alhoon]

I am still angry with pathfinder for stealing everything from SRD 3.5 then running away with it, becoming the greatest competitor to D&D and thus, making sure we will never ever see an OGL like the ones in 3.5.
On top of Pathfinder being the main reason WotC (and anyone else that doesn't live under a rock) will never truly trust open game licenses again realizing they may well be creating their greatest competitors... I consider a kind of backstabbing to bite the hand that feeds you.

Many people have problems with the current WotC view on OGL and how they try to limit it. Part of it is indeed corporate greed. And part of it, is that some sneaky backstabbers used the OGL to temporarily dethrone D&D as leader of gaming. So those of you that don't like the new moves of WotC, blame Corporate greed and blame the backstabbers from Pathfinder.

[Mistmaster]

I am still angry with pathfinder for stealing everything from SRD 3.5 then running away with it, becoming the greatest competitor to D&D and thus, making sure we will never ever see an OGL like the ones in 3.5.
On top of Pathfinder being the main reason WotC (and anyone else that doesn't live under a rock) will never truly trust open game licenses again realizing they may well be creating their greatest competitors... I consider a kind of backstabbing to bite the hand that feeds you.

Many people have problems with the current WotC view on OGL and how they try to limit it. Part of it is indeed corporate greed. And part of it, is that some sneaky backstabbers used the OGL to temporarily dethrone D&D as leader of gaming. So those of you that don't like the new moves of WotC, blame Corporate greed and blame the backstabbers from Pathfinder.

They did that when WoC made 4th ed and abandoned 3.5 thought. Wizards left the field it was obvious someone would step in.

[Speedwagon]

I am still angry with pathfinder for stealing everything from SRD 3.5 then running away with it, becoming the greatest competitor to D&D and thus, making sure we will never ever see an OGL like the ones in 3.5.
On top of Pathfinder being the main reason WotC (and anyone else that doesn't live under a rock) will never truly trust open game licenses again realizing they may well be creating their greatest competitors... I consider a kind of backstabbing to bite the hand that feeds you.

Many people have problems with the current WotC view on OGL and how they try to limit it. Part of it is indeed corporate greed. And part of it, is that some sneaky backstabbers used the OGL to temporarily dethrone D&D as leader of gaming. So those of you that don't like the new moves of WotC, blame Corporate greed and blame the backstabbers from Pathfinder.

They did that when WoC made 4th ed and abandoned 3.5 thought. Wizards left the field it was obvious someone would step in.

Yeah I’m with Mistmaster on that one, but I can understand being upset with how things went down overall

[alhoon]

They did that when WoC made 4th ed and abandoned 3.5 thought. Wizards left the field it was obvious someone would step in.

Two things:
#1: Yes. If WotC wasn't greedy enough to make a new edition solely to get us to rebuy the books, and instead made the move in a way that respected the decades and countless hours of games and fan material of the past, it wouldn't have backfired.

#2: If WotC didn't have such lax OGL and had a much stricter SRD, someone could not have stepped in. So, now we will never again get such a wonderful open license because the stream has been tainted.