Planned Rebuilding before level 2


Pathfinder Society

51 to 66 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
5/5 5/55/55/5

5k worth of diamonds and a friendly cleric solve a lot of plot holes.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

TimD wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:

Um going to say the following bits with two caveats. 1) This is how I learned to roleplay, how I prefer to roleplay and I fully understand that others may enjoy this passtime differently. And 2) I'm in no way trying to say badwrongfun, but feel the opposite is being said of how I enjoy things.

There is a difference if you care about roleplay continuity if character.

Continuity is what you make of it in PFS.

Examples & blatant rhetoric:
Do you refuse to sit at tables with characters who have gone through the same scenarios that you have, but with a different group?
If not, do you tell them they're lying when they tell you about it - just to keep it "in character" as your character should have seen them there and they obviously weren't ... Probably not.

We are at 7 Season of PFS now, and not all of us have been playing since the beginning.
I played a Season 0 last night with a character than had GM credit & had to be completely ret-conned because of PFS changes. Should I make sure to break the 4th wall appropriately to ensure "continuity"? ... Probably not.

If an NPC dies in a scenario you've played and then you end up playing an earlier scenario with that NPC, do you disrupt the table in character to try to resolve the continuity issue? ... I would hope not.

-TimD

EDIT: removed what may have been construed as a personal attack on another forum member at the cost of another opportunity for a Princess Bride quote lost...

All of those can certainly be continuity issues.

But why purposely create continuity issues at the very core of who your character even is if you don't have to?

1/5

I don't have continuity start until my character is locked in. Anything before that he's as formless a blob to me as a GM character would be.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

Andrew Christian wrote:

Um going to say the following bits with two caveats. 1) This is how I learned to roleplay, how I prefer to roleplay and I fully understand that others may enjoy this passtime differently. And 2) I'm in no way trying to say badwrongfun, but feel the opposite is being said of how I enjoy things.

There is a difference if you care about roleplay continuity if character. GM credit blobs have no continuity to maintain. Once a character has been played, using a system that was created to help newbies and allow fixes to concepts that didn't pan out, to do things you couldn't otherwise do (or typically do in a home campaign) is gaming the system.

Using GM credits just starts your continuity a bit later.

If you don't care about roleplay continuity, which I understand that not everyone does, then the difference is largely semantics.

Just a point Andrew, the OPs example would have no continuity issues as he would be trading out a Feat, Weapon Finesse, that he chose and gaining the same Feat as a class feature.

Honestly I think if you ever gain a bonus Feat that you already have you should get a free retrain of that Feat.

4/5

claudekennilol wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Fully agree. Your particular change isn't even that significant and maintains continuity for the character. Hell, I've used rebuild on my archer hunter to have Precise at level 1, then trade it out for Rapid at 2 because I got Precise via class feature. That's practically the same scenario.
But that's actual retraining. That's not "free rebuild at level 1". (or if it was it totally shouldn't have been)

It is a valid use of the "free rebuild at level 1" because it was prior to any experience at level 2. I got my 3rd xp, rebuilt the feat, leveled up and got Precise back. From a character continuity standpoint, I simply gained Rapid Shot when I leveled up. It just made more sense for the character to have Precise straight-away than to whiff with Rapid for a full level given his background.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Serisan wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Fully agree. Your particular change isn't even that significant and maintains continuity for the character. Hell, I've used rebuild on my archer hunter to have Precise at level 1, then trade it out for Rapid at 2 because I got Precise via class feature. That's practically the same scenario.
But that's actual retraining. That's not "free rebuild at level 1". (or if it was it totally shouldn't have been)
It is a valid use of the "free rebuild at level 1" because it was prior to any experience at level 2. I got my 3rd xp, rebuilt the feat, leveled up and got Precise back. From a character continuity standpoint, I simply gained Rapid Shot when I leveled up. It just made more sense for the character to have Precise straight-away than to whiff with Rapid for a full level given his background.

This is how I largely view things as well.

1st level Rogue has Weapon Finesse.
2nd level Rogue has Dodge and Finesse Rogue.

This character didn't have Weapon Finesse, then retrain, then relearn Weapon Finesse. They had Weapon Finesse the whole time, and simply learned how to Dodge.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Julix wrote:

So I'm looking at a Dex Magus level 1, then the next levels unchained Rogue. - I'd like to take Weapon Finesse as 1st level feat for surviving the first few games, then replace it with combat reflexes just before leveling since u-rogue gets finesse for free, and thus the Magus 1 / Rogue 1 wouldn't need that feat.

On the one hand I'm gaming the system (i.e. using a system meant for newbs to change mistakes to get an advantage, or at least counter a disadvantage) on the other there is no ingame inconuitiy (i.e. always has dex to hit) and mechanically the build probably won't overshadow anyone.

a. Is it legal (w/ or w/o table variation)?
b. Is it ethical (anything wrong with it)?
c. would you do it?
d. would you mind if others did?

Thanks for your time! :)

A: yes technically it's legal. If campaign leadership starts getting the idea that gaming the system this way becomes widespread, then you'll be part of the reason it gets spoiled for the honest folks.

B. See A above.

C. No. If I want to play a race/class combination, I'll do it the way I've always done... play that character at first level.

D. I will withhold my opinions of others doing this because of A. If they ask, I will tell them exactly what I think of it, but campaign rules are campaign rules.

Grand Lodge 2/5

"Auntie" Baltwin wrote:
Codanous wrote:

my very first game and very first character was a Half-Orc Barbarian with a great axe. I played through the First Step's Part one with him and ** spoiler omitted ** After that in first steps part 2 and on I made a Dwarven Stonelord Paladin of Torag, I didn't try to say it was the same person though. I think that is what the first level rebuild rules are good for, finding what works for you and what doesn't and then changing accordingly.

I however find nothing wrong with people that take weapon finesse at level 1, then retrain it to something else if they are getting a class that grants it for free.

"Old Granny McFanny"? do I know this lady? surely not...

I've run first steps like three times and I've never had that encounter escalate into combat.

Nefreet wrote:
Serisan wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Fully agree. Your particular change isn't even that significant and maintains continuity for the character. Hell, I've used rebuild on my archer hunter to have Precise at level 1, then trade it out for Rapid at 2 because I got Precise via class feature. That's practically the same scenario.
But that's actual retraining. That's not "free rebuild at level 1". (or if it was it totally shouldn't have been)
It is a valid use of the "free rebuild at level 1" because it was prior to any experience at level 2. I got my 3rd xp, rebuilt the feat, leveled up and got Precise back. From a character continuity standpoint, I simply gained Rapid Shot when I leveled up. It just made more sense for the character to have Precise straight-away than to whiff with Rapid for a full level given his background.

This is how I largely view things as well.

1st level Rogue has Weapon Finesse.
2nd level Rogue has Dodge and Finesse Rogue.

This character didn't have Weapon Finesse, then retrain, then relearn Weapon Finesse. They had Weapon Finesse the whole time, and simply learned how to Dodge.

claudekennilol wrote:

Andrew Roberts wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Serisan wrote:
Fully agree. Your particular change isn't even that significant and maintains continuity for the character. Hell, I've used rebuild on my archer hunter to have Precise at level 1, then trade it out for Rapid at 2 because I got Precise via class feature. That's practically the same scenario.
But that's actual retraining. That's not "free rebuild at level 1". (or if it was it totally shouldn't have been)

Why not? One of the most common things I see with Core rogues is to have weapon finesse at level 1 and then when the character hits 2 and before you play it at 2, you rebuild to not have weapon finesse and take the finesse rogue trait (Which is why I'm glad that unchained rogue exists now).

You can rebuild before you PLAY the character at level 2, so you can rebuild it before the first game at level 2 (or higher, if GM credited).

My mistake, I was confused and thought Rapid Shot's prereq was Precise Shot (but it's not, it's Point-Blank Shot). Being aware of my confusion, I don't have a problem with it.

But to clarify what I meant, I was meaning that you can't "free rebuild" a first level feat to something that has a prereq for something you're getting at second level--that would be retraining and not "free rebuilding".

The Exchange 5/5

Yeah, First Steps...

I've actually always wondered if I was the only person to notice that the Chronicle for that has a scroll of remove disease on it... the only place you can get that is by "removing" it from Aunties House. So the PCs are assumed to steal the "medicine" from the orphanage.

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:

Yeah, First Steps...

... the only place you can get that is by "removing" it from Aunties House. So the PCs are assumed to steal the "medicine" from the orphanage.

Why bet against the odds? :)


BigNorseWolf wrote:
nosig wrote:

Yeah, First Steps...

... the only place you can get that is by "removing" it from Aunties House. So the PCs are assumed to steal the "medicine" from the orphanage.

Why bet against the odds? :)

I think there's a general approach of "Don't screw the players for doing the right thing." If you succeed in whatever the encounter is and could have gotten access to the item, it's on the list. Even if you gave it back to the rightful owner in play. Or used it up, for that matter.

It's an abstraction, like so much else.

4/5 5/55/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis

1 person marked this as a favorite.

a. Is it legal (w/ or w/o table variation)?

Yes.

b. Is it ethical (anything wrong with it)?

In the case you gave, I see nothing wrong with it. Your character maintains consistency between first and second level, you just rearranged what order they learned things so as to enhance survivability at 1st level.

Not doing it on Bards seems wrong to me. You avoid taking the skill that you will get via Versatile Performance at 2nd so that you can suddenly go from unskilled to very skilled? No, I would rather they just move the skill points as part of the rebuild.

c. would you do it?

I have done something like that for a different case that also involved multi-classing. In my case it was taking toughness and swapping it for spell focus at 2nd level. Consistent in that the hit points did not go down between first and second level.

d. would you mind if others did?

No.

I also don't have problems with the people that take this to an extreme. I don't encourage this, mostly because they are missing the opportunity to try out the new character. On the other hand, after a while those first few levels become less and less interesting and more something to get through so you can play what you want.

Grand Lodge 2/5

nosig wrote:

Yeah, First Steps...

I've actually always wondered if I was the only person to notice that the Chronicle for that has a scroll of remove disease on it... the only place you can get that is by "removing" it from Aunties House. So the PCs are assumed to steal the "medicine" from the orphanage.

Spoiler:
I don't remember the entirety of the specifics, but enough to know the PCs are well within their right to take it if they found it (they usually don't in my experience unless the GM specifically prompts them for a random perception check they didn't ask for). The PCs are sent to find out if Auntie Baldwin is deserving of charity. While the children are cared for, she obviously doesn't deserve (or need) the charity. Most everything she can handle with her magical abilities. She sells the charitable items for profit and uses it for booze. Only the kids that are really sick get the items (and of course magic so not many would).

I remember the first time I ran this when the PCs finally managed to split her focus so one could sneak off to talk with the kids he specifically said "I find the sickest kid I can find" so he could ask that kid questions. Of course the kid only had good stuff to say (as most of the orphans do but you had to look into it--but in this case the sickest would be the most difficult to get the desired info out of because they get the best care).

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
nosig wrote:

Yeah, First Steps...

Spoiler:
I've actually always wondered if I was the only person to notice that the Chronicle for that has a scroll of remove disease on it... the only place you can get that is by "removing" it from Aunties House. So the PCs are assumed to steal the "medicine" from the orphanage.

Spoiler:
It's my take on it that Olystra Zadrian makes the resource available to the PCs if they don't find it specifically in thanks for having accomplished the fact-finding for her. Seamless, invisible, and makes more sense than 'we rob the orphanage'.
The Exchange 5/5

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
nosig wrote:

Yeah, First Steps...

** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **

Ah! That works.

I guess part of my problem is the times I have run this and had players murder hobo this encounter. It's an issue when we have to come up with combat stats for sick kids.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
nosig wrote:


Ah! That works.

I guess part of my problem is the times I have run this and had players murder hobo this encounter. It's an issue when we have to come up with combat stats for sick kids.

Confirmation Scenario:
I've played the Confirmation a bunch. Yet the *first* time I sat down at an actual physical table to play it at GenCon we almost MDK'd Uori. Couldn't Diplomance our way out of a pool of water, and it was the first time I'd ever seen THAT happen. First time the *GM* had seen it happen. Every other time the Diplomancers had a field day... not this time. To our GM's credit, she ran it intelligently and we managed to avoid that unpleasant fate.

In fact, because it was my last L1 adventure with the character, it helped him refocus his skills a lot to be much more... rounded.

51 to 66 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Planned Rebuilding before level 2 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.