D&D 5E What Paizo Adventures (Paths or otherwise) Have You Run in 5E

[Reynard]

Could you elaborate?

Pathfinder APs are build very specifically around the Encounters Per Level paradigm that is specific to that system. This means there are a lot of filler encounters. Because 5E has different assumptions about encounters per level, simply swapping our 5E versions of the monsters is not going to make them good 5E adventures from a design standpoint. And that's not even considering the possible differences in.design intent, CR, etc for monsters between the two games.

 

[payn]

Pathfinder APs are build very specifically around the Encounters Per Level paradigm that is specific to that system. This means there are a lot of filler encounters. Because 5E has different assumptions about encounters per level, simply swapping our 5E versions of the monsters is not going to make them good 5E adventures from a design standpoint. And that's not even considering the possible differences in.design intent, CR, etc for monsters between the two games.

Actually, Id think the filler (which I largely skipped in place of milestone leveling in PF1) would lead to a good transfer to 5E with its 6-8 encounter per day framework.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Pathfinder APs are build very specifically around the Encounters Per Level paradigm that is specific to that system. This means there are a lot of filler encounters. Because 5E has different assumptions about encounters per level, simply swapping our 5E versions of the monsters is not going to make them good 5E adventures from a design standpoint. And that's not even considering the possible differences in.design intent, CR, etc for monsters between the two games.

Yes, my approach is both to remove about 50% of the encounters and to replace the monsters of the remaining encounters rather than attempt converting them.

 

[Reynard]

Yes, my approach is both to remove about 50% of the encounters and to replace the monsters of the remaining encounters rather than attempt converting them.

Right, my goal for such a project would be to "rewrite" the adventure for 5E, not simply convert statblocks.

 

[Zardnaar]

5E and PF1E have different assumptions about encounters and difficulty and XP. It might be easier, but it won't create a satisfying experience.

I ad hoc the encounters. Orcs are still orcs but the numbers get adjusted up or down on the fly.

Pathfinder exclusive critters are a bit harder to do. You either convert on the fly, prepare ahead of time or replace.

No right or wrong answer it's how much work you want to put in. I used large chunks of Rose of Runelords recently and more or less ran it as is along with a 3.0 adventure.

3E kinda sucks but they had a stupid amount of quality adventures espicially in Dungeon and Pathfinder.

 

[Reynard]

I ad hoc the encounters. Orcs are still orcs but the numbers get adjusted up or down on the fly.

Pathfinder exclusive critters are a bit harder to do. You either convert on the fly, prepare ahead of time or replace.

Sure. I am not talking about just managing to run the game. I am interested in doing a rewrite and conversion.

 

[Zardnaar]

Pathfinder APs are build very specifically around the Encounters Per Level paradigm that is specific to that system. This means there are a lot of filler encounters. Because 5E has different assumptions about encounters per level, simply swapping our 5E versions of the monsters is not going to make them good 5E adventures from a design standpoint. And that's not even considering the possible differences in.design intent, CR, etc for monsters between the two games.

PF assumptions are less than 5E btw.

 

[Reynard]

PF assumptions are less than 5E btw.

It only matters that they a different.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sure. I am not talking about just managing to run the game. I am interested in doing a rewrite and conversion.

Yeah that's fine it's just more work.

Encounters are close enough to almost run as is. 5E characters are generally more powerful though so I've noticed encounters are easy.

Levels 1-3 it's close enough generally.

Anything after reign of winter I'm lost on though. I mined the 3E APs and Kingmaker, Skull and Shackles, The snake men one and Rise of Runelords a lot.

Didn't run them as is though. Need a map or adventure on short notice though they're great.

 

[Voadam]

I found running through the first two and three modules in converted APs that keeping the number and CR of monsters the same with 5e equivalents worked fine for me. I never did the math to see how they stack up to the 5e DMG encounter guideline/evaluations. The only adjustment was when the party I was running for expanded from four to five PCs near the end of module 2 in Iron Gods. Going with milestone advancements over a campaign it was easy to hold them back one advancement and I then had them face things one level ahead of the module expectations which seemed to work.

Pathfinder APs are designed for 3e/Pathfinder advancement rates with a lot of combat encounters per level. I am usually fine with that pace and find most of the encounters in the APs I have run engaging or interesting, but it is easy to cut out a number of encounters for a quicker 5e advancement pace and still maintain AP story cohesion if you want.