No on the "You are still alive" as the only metric for a successful encounter. Each encounter should have a purpose and a goal. If the party succeeds at their goal for the encounter then they receive XP.
Sneaking past a sleeping dragon get the heroes closer to the next level? Yes, they passed through a dangerous situation and got closer to their goal, congratulations!
Drugging the crime boss with a knock out pill and avoiding a series of encounters as a result? Again, yes, they moved closer to their goals and should be rewarded.
If they sneak past the dragon to steal from his horde, but that leaves the enraged dragon to burn the village they were supposed to protect? No, you get rewarded with cash, but you failed at your actual story goals.
Drugging the crime boss with a knock out pill, but then you forgot to actually get the information you needed from him in the first place? No, you got too distracted with eliminating a threat and failed the actual important goal of the encounter.
Experience is an award. It's a way to tell your players "Good job, you're moving onward and upward." That's why I keep it in my games and don't do milestone XP.
All that is to say, If you just slap some status effects on a dragon it won't feel like a Pathfinder 2e zombie.
I would build it from the ground up based on the Monster Creation Rules using the existing zombies as your templates, and then slap on a fetid breath weapon special attack or some other zombie/dragon hybrid ability.
All right, I had a look at the zombies which appear in Bestiary 1, and they all follow pretty similar patterns.
Based on that information, here are the key features of zombies.
Pretty terrible perception (though they do have darkvision)
Decent athletics, which improves to excellent as they grow in size.
Absolutely trash AC and Ref saves, bad Will saves, respectable Fort saves.
A huge number of HP. We're talking about something like double the normal maximum for that level. This is balanced out by having two different weaknesses which are also much higher than usual for their level.
The stronger level 6 Hulk tones this down a bit, it has only 30% more health than usual, but also only has a slightly above average weakness.
They also generally only have one or two special attacks, which are pretty straight forward. Zombies are not known for their guile and trickery.
First, I'll agree that the "You must start your movement on a horizontal surface." clause prevents you from chaining wall runs up a vertical surface.
As to the "...you fall after taking your next action..." line, I read that as "gravity comes back into effect one action after the wall run".
Normally gravity does what gravity does, but if you have an ability, spell, or effect that continues to give gravity the middle finger, you can feel free to ignore the call of the earth.
I would actually go in a different direction than Fuzzy-Wuzzy. It seems like functionally you just had one fight, but split both teams up into different rooms. So I would award experience as if it was one battle.
If you had a fight where an enemy casts Wall of Stone to split the party in two, and then half the enemies fought one group of PCs while the other half fought the other group of PCs, I would likewise count it as one battle with one pool of xp even though the combatants were separated.
Rituals are very much in the realm of story shaping abilities. Rituals are also essentially all uncommon, so GM permission was needed to obtain them in the first place.
The combination of those two things leads me to believe that if you want to pull off rituals well you should talk to your GM to make it happen. Support from a mages guild, circle of adherents, assistance from the clergy, or whatever can all make rituals work really well.
Rituals aren't designed to be a thing that a player just decides to use and cast at will, like common spells. They require buy-in from other people and integration into the narrative to make them work.
Question for whoever might have read the adventure, what's up with;
Minor adventure spoiler:
Granny's Hedge Trimmer? It's treated like a big reward, is rare with the magical and evocation traits, but is just a d4 simple weapon?
I'm definitely going to customize it myself, but does anyone have any ideas for what it should be?
This is a confusing one but I'll try my best, and bump the post while I'm at it
First "The wall as a whole is immune to counteracting effects of the wall’s level or lower;" I believe this is simply rewriting the normal degrees of successes for the Counteract rule.
Second "each color must be counteracted by its specific spell, as described in chromatic wall." I think this is where I ran into most of my own confusion. At first I thought to look at all of the counteracting rules from Chromatic Wall but that just created more inconsistencies with Prismatic Wall regarding the counteraction levels. I think all we are supposed to take away from this line is that the spells used to counteract the colors stay the same.
In short, I agree with your second supposition, it indicate that (unlike Chromatic Wall) each of the spells cast to dispel colors of the wall must be higher level than the wall.
As for the question about ignoring effects, I don't think you could normally cast through it due to the very mundane reason that the wall is opaque. If you could somehow see through it to target someone or something on the other side, then yes, you would ignore all of the spell/energy blocking effects of the wall.
More specifically, spells don't have a Tradition trait until they are cast, at which point they do.
From the "Magical Traditions" pop-out on page 299 of the core rulebook wrote:
When you cast a spell, add your tradition’s trait to the spell.
So to answer your question, yes when a druid casts Acidic Burst it gains the Primal tag.
From looking at the feat it seems like more of a style thing.
Unlike most other classes, the fighter has no discrete "sub-class" they choose at level one. Instead, many of their feats are tied into certain forms of weaponry, and by focusing on those feat groups you are choosing a fighting style.
In order to keep these fighting styles unique and coherent, many of them have certain themes and patterns to bind them together.
For instance, because of it's limitations Knockdown is in both the "Free-Hand Fighter" group and the "Two-Handed Weapon" group. Free-hand weapon feats often deal with combat maneuvers, while two-handed weapon feats often focus on pushing your opponent around. Knockdown fits both of these themes pretty well, so they align it with those weapon groups.
On the other hand, shield feats are essentially all defensive in nature, focusing on the shield. Knockdown would be a bit out of left field compared to those.
Long story short, Knockdown fits the themes of the free-hand and two-handed weapon styles, it doesn't fit the themes of the shield-user fighting style.
Perhaps with more books and more feats released we'll get some more branching out of the styles, maybe a set of shield-shove/shield-bash feats, but for now we're pretty much just working with the Core Rulebook so things are limited.
1. When using Handwraps of Might Blows do you gain their item bonus to any maneuvers?
No (most of the time). Only specific weapon traits allow you to add a weapon's item bonus to skill based maneuvers, and most unarmed attacks do not have those traits. If you do happen to gain an unarmed attack with the Disarm, Grapple, etc. trait then you would apply the bonus.
2. Would you need both hands free to use the Fighter feat Combat Grab if using unarmed strikes?
No. The feat only requires you to have one hand free. According to the Unarmed weapon trait (and the Free-Hand trait assuming you are using a claw or other hand based attack), your hand you are using to attack with is still counted as free unless you actually use it to pick up and hold something. Of course if you succeed at your Combat Grab and your only free hand was the one you used to attack and then grab, you now no longer have a free hand.
3. Can you combine Combat Grab and Flurry of Blows?
No. Both of those are special actions that contain Strike actions. Actions can only be nested inside each other when specifically called out as such.
Yup, I agree with Squiggit.
Ki Strike is a special action (a spell) that contains the simple Strike action, and Tiger Slash is a special action that contains the Strike action. They don't contain each other.
And yes as well, everything is doubled on a crit other than "Benefits you gain specifically from a critical hit, like the flaming weapon rune’s persistent fire damage or the extra damage die from the fatal weapon trait, aren’t doubled." according to page 451 of the Core Rulebook.
I'll agree, the line "This good damage can affect non-evil creatures" overrides the general "These damage types apply only to creatures that have the opposing alignment trait." of alignment damage.
That removes the restriction of an aligned damage, but still allows it to deal extra damage to a creature with a weakness to good such as the various fiends.
CRB 578 wrote:
Using purer forms of common materials is so relatively inexpensive that the Price is included in any magic item.
So it is assumed that higher quality magic items do require higher quality materials, it's just that the price of high quality steel or w/e is negligible compared to the price of the high quality enchantment.
I wanted to chime in and thank you for sharing this work.
I started to convert this campaign for my own group, but life has gotten busy and I just didn't have enough time to do all the normal prep and the conversion as well.
These documents make the difference between keeping the campaign going and giving up to run something simpler.
Looking at the ABP rules, it seems to always be specifying magic items, and never mentions alchemical items.
"This variant removes the item bonus to rolls and DCs usually provided by magic items..."
The reference in the second paragraph under "Adjusting Items and Treasure" is a bit more vague, but still seems to be focusing on magic items.
As an additional resource, by checking the damage of greatsword wielding creatures in the bestiary we find 5 creatures.
ghaele azata(level 13, 2d12, medium), fire giant (Level 10, 2d12, Large), storm giant (Level 13, 2d12, Huge), Rune Giant (Level 16, 3d12 Gargantuan), Grave knight (Level 10, 2d12, Medium)
So all creatures level 10-13, sizes medium to huge have 2d12 greatswords. Our outlier is the level 16 gargantuan rune giant.
Since creatures of the same level but different sizes share number of damage die, I'm willing to bet that the reason the rune giant has a larger number of damage die is because of it's higher level, not it's greater size.
According to table 6-7 in the Pathfinder 2e core rulebook, a greatsword deals 1d12 damage. Nowhere does it specify that only certain kinds or sizes of greatswords deal 1d12 damage (excepting more specific special abilities, magic runes, etc).
The only part of the weapons chart that is called out as variable based on size is the Bulk column, which specifies that the relevant information is on page 295.
Page 295 gives us information on how larger or smaller items have different bulk and potentially a different price than small/medium items, but that is all.
No houserules needed, all relevant information is presented.
Whether you are using lore, crafting, perform, or some other skill, they would all use the same DC for earn income. I would advise you do have the player roll the normal earn income checks and either flavor it as them spending time trying to find buyers or otherwise working on or finishing the sketches they made while on the road.
I don't advise you treat each sketch as in individually priced art object. Art objects, gems, jewelry, precious metals and the like aren't really meant to be things that PCs produce and sell. They mostly exist to make treasure more interesting than "you find a pile of 40 gold coins".
Any balanced attempt to house rule a system for PCs to work on items to sell is just going to be a more complicated version of the existing downtime rules.
I'm just saying their is precedence for a feat that gives immunity to fall damage. Now that I think of it the 2nd level monk feat Dancing Leaf can also negate an arbitrarily high amount of falling damage as long as their is a horizontal surface to fall next to.
That gives us Skill, Ancestry, and Class feats that can negate falling damage, with differing levels of investment and limitation required.
Also, Goblins are the joke ancestry with weird and wacky abilities. That's one of the major reasons many people didn't like them being added in as a core ancestry, they have a reputation as being evil and zany. Which one of those two qualities is a bigger problem is up to personal interpretation.
Edit: Also, none of those three feats call out a need to be conscious. Which does bring up some questions with Cat Fall's "always land on your feet" aspect. Just do a triple flip and stick the landing with your eyes closed and snoring.
No, it just means that the action itself to shapechange has the concentrate tag.
Looking at the barghest for example, it is one action for them to Change Shape which includes a bunch of tags, notably concentrate. That means if a barghest tries to change shape while within reach of a fighter in Disruptive Stance the fighter can use an attack of opportunity and potentially disrupt that action.
I think I've heard that 5e has a concentrate mechanic similar to what you're talking about, but Pf2 doesn't. The Sustain a Spell action is a little similar but less restrictive.
It's just a tag that other things can interact with.
Many descriptor tags don't do anything by themselves in Pf2 until there is something for them to interact with. Emotion is another good example, the emotion tag on a spell or effect doesn't mean anything until you try to use it against someone with resistance to emotion effects.
Addendum: While it isn't canon, a certain user called Pronate has reverse engineered a system for designing Pathfinder 2e weapons, which can be found here.
Based on their guide the ogre hook seems to line up more as an advanced weapon than a martial one. Again, that's not official, but Pronate's formula is reasonably accurate.
I'll chime in mostly to agree with Talonhawke.
1. Reach isn't listed in the weapon description, and ogres are large bipeds so most likely the reach is based on the ogre themselves. Notice that even the ogre glutton has a reach of 10' with their greataxe which is also not normally a reach weapon.
2. I am unwilling to take a stand on martial or advanced since it's not listed.
3. Yup, the sidebar says they are uncommon. Pretty much every ancestry specific weapon is.
4a. Changing size only changes the weight of the object, not any of the other stats. Since they are a two-handed weapon with 2 bulk, and almost every two-handed medium sized weapon in the core rulebook is also 2 bulk, I would be tempted to leave it as is.
4b. In regard to if they are only for large users, I would assume that the vast majority of ogre hooks are made by and for ogres, so they would be large. If a non-large creature wanted to use one however, I see no reason why the design couldn't be scaled down appropriately.
So, 5 monsters, 1 background, 6 feats, 3 ancestries, and 1 page of rules include the word jungle according to AoN.
Monsters: All 5 use jungle in the flavor text or simply in the name of the monster, no rules text involvement.
Backgrounds: The background introduces "Jungle Lore". Since by design lore skills are meant to be more specific than general, this seems fine. Similar to having "Lore Vampire" rather than "Lore Undead". Notably it does translate jungle to forest when the Terrain Expertise feat comes into play.
Feats: Of the six feats none of them refer to only jungles in a rules sense. Either the word jungle is used in the flavor text (as in wildborn adept), or they refer to "forests and/or jungles" (such as Wandering Heart or Woodcraft). The repetitive use of "forest or jungle" tied together leads me to believe they are just covering for people who might read forest and think it only applies to temperate forests.
Ancestries: The references to jungle in the ancestries were ancestry feats already covered by the last section, moving on.
Rules: Flavor text.
In conclusion I can't find a problem. From looking at every use of the word jungle in rules text it's either actually flavor text, or it's serving as a reminder that the more exotic jungle environment is included in the more mundane sounding forest environment.
Wall of Stone and Continual Flame have two different durations that interact in different ways.
Wall of Stone has no duration, so it's an instant spell, the magic is in raising and shaping the stone, but the stone is mundane after that and has to be dealt with like a normal wall of rock.
Continual Flame has a duration of unlimited, which means the spell is still continuing to feed the flame forever. If that magical fuel source is removed the flame will go out just like any fire without fuel.
Why do Unicorns need darkvision? What is Darkvision? and other philosophical questions about the senses in PF2
As a GM I do houserule out some creature's darkvision. When I was running Legacy of Fire and my players asked "Why do gnolls have darkvision?" my answer was "because hyena's have darkvision". Oh wait, no, hyenas only have low-light vision.
Why do creatures who are conceptually a mix of hyena and human have better senses than either of their parent species?
And I've been houseruling out unnecessary darkvision ever since that revelation.
After going over evary weapon in the game, I have reversed engineered a guide to make balanced custom weapons
Love the guide, I'm going to have a lot of fun throwing weird weapons at my players with this, but I do have a few editorial notes;
Have Constrict and NO DC
Have Constict and a DC
Have Greater Constrict and a DC
Of the 26 creatures in the bestiary with either the "Constrict" or "Greater Constrict" 4 of them have no listed DC (all 4 of them also have Constrict, not the greater version).
Based on the text of Constrict as found in the ability glossary all of these monster should have DCs, and if they don't, they should have some special text explaining the change.
Given the rules text and the number of creatures affected by the problem I'm willing to assume this is an error, and that they should have DCs. Luckily all of the affected monsters have at least one ability that calls for a saving throw, so copying that number should work fine for the most part (in fact all but the shoggoth have Fort save targeting abilities).
Yeah, a one-handed flute or something similar could work. Hold it to your lips with one hand and keep the other free. A small drum could be on a belt across the chest or waist and then tapped with one hand.
As to why you would use a two-handed instrument, if you are a more magic focused bard then having your hands full with an instrument doesn't really impede you at all. Telekinetic projectile is a fairly nice cantrip that is at least as good as (if not better than) using a weapon, depending on your investment in Str and Dex.