Is it bad form to play a 1st level-only character?


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

I convinced a a friend to play PFS with me this coming week, and I am starting a new character to play along side him. However I am unsure what exactly I want to play come level 2.

At the moment, I have a spec'ed out a level 1 sorceress that specializes in magic missiles (+4 CL for MM, +1 damage per die). Even if I played this character past 1st level, I wouldn't be playing it this focused, or with these stats.

I am relatively new to PFS, so is this design based on the free rebuilding is considered a breach of etiquette?

4/5

It's considered somewhat cheesy, but happens. The most common form I've read about is the one-level barbarian. A first-level, two-handed barbarian is nigh-unstoppable and is a lot less likely to end up dead than the caster you intend to play long-term.

I'd generally recommend just playing pregens for the first-level if you want to avoid cheesing.

5/5 5/55/55/5

A minor tweak like that probably won't be a blip on the cheeseometer.


I wouldn't worry about it. In fact, you could try three distinct builds of 1st level characters for the three adventures it takes to level up to 2nd just to see what you like best.

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

Play what you will enjoy and doesn't detract from the group.

One of the reasons they allow the first level rebuild is so that a person doesn't feel trapped by their initial choices. Trying a class at first level for one adventure is fine.

That said, I would be more concerned with the +4 CL you've put on that sorc.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

If you don't overdo it, it's fine.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

First level is awful anyway, so do whatever you want.

1/5

I would say that especially if you are new, then you should feel more then free to take full advantage of the free retraining offered to first level characters. Heck, try a build out, then talk to to the other players after the game for how to tweak him.

4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Tampere

Some people will give you hell for it. Most people won't care a bit. In the end, it's permitted within the rules of the campaign.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

7 people marked this as a favorite.

One person's BadWrongFun is another person's GoodRightFun. This applies to nearly any question not specifically covered by rules that starts with, "Is it wrong to..." Table/Regional variation will determine how accepted said practice is. There is no hard n' fast rule. Persoanlly, I think character design should start with a concept and a theme. The game mechanics should be selected after to create said character with deference to form over function. Thus, I would not do what you are describing. However, that doesn't make it wrong. In most cases, no one is going to know you did it anyway. It could just as easily be another character you created. 1st level is 1st level. You could be doing what is described above—testing a few different builds to see what you like best. Intention is a lot in cases like this. If you advertise that you are intentionally building an opto/uber build at 1st level, like a min/max barbarian, just to get to 2nd level and then change it to your "real" character, some will object and disrespect you. We all know opinions are like...well, you know the saying. Best thing to do is check with your local gaming community and see what things they are comfortable with accepting. It certainly helps the feeling of community if you play in a style that is accepted and encouraged by those you will be playing with.

Explore! Report! Cooperate!

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Houston

My kitsune started off with 3 different career paths, cleric, fighter, rogue. Before I settled for a flavorful role of dervish dancer bard.

Grand Lodge

It's level one, the number of cheap great-axe-related deaths you face warrants going for a build that will make it to level two.

3/5

Some may look at you askance for creating a character that only works at level 1 with the intention to rebuild. I actively encourage it, especially if it helps survivability.

I have a stock level 1, just in case my GM cedits don't enable me to escape playing at level 1 (Even has a character based on the concept - Joe Nvar Lvel - an old embittered sergeant type, who tries to keep the new whippersnappers alive, even though he knows someone else always gets the credit).

Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

Thank you everyone for the swift replies. I will take your comments into consideration.

I saw someone mention being worried about +4 CL, so...

Level 1 Human Tattooed Sorcerer (Inner Sea Magic)

Feats: Level 1 - Spell Focus: Evocation, Human - Spell Specialization, Magic Missile (+2 CL), Tattooed Sorcerer 1 - Varisian Tattoo - Evocation (+1 CL)

Traits: Reactionary, Gifted Adept: Magic Missile (+1 CL) (Ultimate Campaign)

Familiar: Greensting Scorpion (Ultimate Magic)

Strength 9
Dexterity 12
Constitution 12
Intellegence 10
Wisdom 10
Charisma 20 (+2 castings!)

Bloodline: Orc (Orcs of Golarion)

Level 1 spells: Magic Missile, Color Spray (in case they get to close)

Gear includes Liquid Ice (Adventurer's Armory) for 40g in case I have to Ray of Ice people.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally consider it bad form, but the main reason I dislike it is how it can short-changes the character's story by denying that level 2+ character you are going to make the chance at cool things happening.

For example, my vigilante picked up a protege and defeated her first "supervillain" in First Steps. If I had been playing Barbarian McTribalscars XXIV, that wouldn't have happened.

If you really have a build that doesnt work at all at level one or two and you really want to play it, GM credit something. The world needs more GMs.

Scarab Sages

JamesTheDonkey wrote:

Thank you everyone for the swift replies. I will take your comments into consideration.

I saw someone mention being worried about +4 CL, so...

Level 1 Human Tattooed Sorcerer (Inner Sea Magic)

Feats: Level 1 - Spell Focus: Evocation, Human - Spell Specialization, Magic Missile (+2 CL), Tattooed Sorcerer 1 - Varisian Tattoo - Evocation (+1 CL)

Traits: Reactionary, Gifted Adept: Magic Missile (+1 CL) (Ultimate Campaign)

Familiar: Greensting Scorpion (Ultimate Magic)

Strength 9
Dexterity 12
Constitution 12
Intellegence 10
Wisdom 10
Charisma 20 (+2 castings!)

Bloodline: Orc (Orcs of Golarion)

Level 1 spells: Magic Missile, Color Spray (in case they get to close)

Gear includes Liquid Ice (Adventurer's Armory) for 40g in case I have to Ray of Ice people.

It's a nifty build, but two key considerations:

First, that's only 5 spells per day with magic missile. Most of the time, someone with a bow or crossbow will be doing more damage per round. A wand of magic missiles (2 prestige points) will not be affected by any of your CL improvements, but has 50 charges when bought.

Second, there is a level 1 counter for magic missile: Shield. In a recent PFS mission for my level 1 character, we actually had an opponent that used shield to totally shut down a party member who had previously been spamming a wand of magic missile.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Murdock Mudeater wrote:
JamesTheDonkey wrote:

Thank you everyone for the swift replies. I will take your comments into consideration.

I saw someone mention being worried about +4 CL, so...

Level 1 Human Tattooed Sorcerer (Inner Sea Magic)

Feats: Level 1 - Spell Focus: Evocation, Human - Spell Specialization, Magic Missile (+2 CL), Tattooed Sorcerer 1 - Varisian Tattoo - Evocation (+1 CL)

Traits: Reactionary, Gifted Adept: Magic Missile (+1 CL) (Ultimate Campaign)

Familiar: Greensting Scorpion (Ultimate Magic)

Strength 9
Dexterity 12
Constitution 12
Intellegence 10
Wisdom 10
Charisma 20 (+2 castings!)

Bloodline: Orc (Orcs of Golarion)

Level 1 spells: Magic Missile, Color Spray (in case they get to close)

Gear includes Liquid Ice (Adventurer's Armory) for 40g in case I have to Ray of Ice people.

It's a nifty build, but two key considerations:

First, that's only 5 spells per day with magic missile. Most of the time, someone with a bow or crossbow will be doing more damage per round. A wand of magic missiles (2 prestige points) will not be affected by any of your CL improvements, but has 50 charges when bought.

Second, there is a level 1 counter for magic missile: Shield. In a recent PFS mission for my level 1 character, we actually had an opponent that used shield to totally shut down a party member who had previously been spamming a wand of magic missile.

so - what would you suggest he does to "fix" the issues you see?

Though this game of ours is sort of "Rock-Paper-Scissors"... there is always going to be somebody that can "totally shut down a party member".

and anyway - it looks like he's "fall back" is color spray, so not a bad backup spell at 1st level. And maybe buy a crossbow...

I might have suggested to the OP to move the odd build point from STR to CON - (giving an 8 STR and a 13 CON) slightly less carrying capacity for one more HP before dead... but that is just me...

Scarab Sages

Abadari wrote:

so - what would you suggest he does to "fix" the issues you see?

Though this game of ours is sort of "Rock-Paper-Scissors"... there is always going to be somebody that can "totally shut down a party member".

and anyway - it looks like he's "fall back" is color spray, so not a bad backup spell at 1st level. And maybe buy a crossbow...

I might have suggested to the OP to move the odd build point from STR to CON - (giving an 8 STR and a 13 CON) slightly less carrying capacity for one more HP before dead... but that is just me...

For a level 1 character? I'd just get a regular Wand of Magic Missile and make sure my character has use magic device.

Then I'd build anything for my character, because, that wand is going to be much more impressive than anything an actual caster is able to pump out at level 1, just because 50 charges lets them really spam it.

For his sorcerer, I'd pick spells which are more versatile in function for my level 1 spells known. I might swap an older spell for magic missile at higher levels, but I think at first level, James is better off with a wand for his magic missile spamming.

Scarab Sages

JamesTheDonkey wrote:
I convinced a a friend to play PFS with me this coming week, and I am starting a new character to play along side him. However I am unsure what exactly I want to play come level 2.

This is normal, don't worry about it.

Focus on learning the game and trying out all the character options. Eventually, you'll find one you really like and stick with it for higher levels.

Yes, you can totally make a stack of 3xp level 1 characters.

It is notable that some missions will not grant xp for repeat plays. So if you only play 1st level characters, you may reach a point where your mission options are extremely limited in terms of what grants xp. Though if your intention is to exclusively play level 1 characters, this isn't really a problem.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Abadari wrote:

so - what would you suggest he does to "fix" the issues you see?

Though this game of ours is sort of "Rock-Paper-Scissors"... there is always going to be somebody that can "totally shut down a party member".

and anyway - it looks like he's "fall back" is color spray, so not a bad backup spell at 1st level. And maybe buy a crossbow...

I might have suggested to the OP to move the odd build point from STR to CON - (giving an 8 STR and a 13 CON) slightly less carrying capacity for one more HP before dead... but that is just me...

For a level 1 character? I'd just get a regular Wand of Magic Missile and make sure my character has use magic device.

Then I'd build anything for my character, because, that wand is going to be much more impressive than anything an actual caster is able to pump out at level 1, just because 50 charges lets them really spam it.

For his sorcerer, I'd pick spells which are more versatile in function for my level 1 spells known. I might swap an older spell for magic missile at higher levels, but I think at first level, James is better off with a wand for his magic missile spamming.

My wife's #1 PC is an Evoker wizard - and her 1st level power is "Force Missile" - basically a magic missile (does 1d4 + 1/2CL in damage). At first level she got 8 of these a day (in addition to her spells). On the short run, less than 50, but ... it didn't cost her 2PP either.

But I think the OOP is looking at the 3 missiles per casting... doing 3d4+3 (or was it +6?).

Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

The Orc Bloodline bumps it to 3d4+6, since you get +1 per die. The back up plan was to use Ray of Frost. 1d3+2 (1 from orc bloodline, 1 from liquid ice focus) at touch attack seemed to be on par with 1d8 against AC from a light crossbow. Sure, the range is considerably shorter, but in my experience, limited that it is, most rooms are not much larger than 30 feet anyway.

Also, this would be a 0 chronicle sheet character, so I don't have 2 PP to spend on a wand yet.

I am also not a new player. I am relatively new to PFS. My main character just hit 12 XP. I did just come off GM'ing a home game that went weekly for almost 2 and a half years.

I know full well this build is purely for level 1, and that I am intentionally using the the retraining rules. I just want to know if there is a table etiquette against this.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Short answer: it varies by region and table and what you are doing.

Long answer: see Bob J's answer above for what is the best general answer.

I'd also add that I know that when I was a store coordinator (before the FLGS I was coordinating for closed) I had a whole host of 1st L characters that I had built so that I could help make tables where necessary to balance out tables, especially for newer players. A lot of the reaction you will get is going to have to do with WHY you are playing a purpose-built 1st L and if you are overshadowing those who are not playing a purpose-built 1st L character. If you have a purpose-built healer that you break out to assist tables of new characters where you play for no credit people will have less issues than if you have a character which over performs to the point that you can effectively solo the scenario.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just a note about the build.... Spell Specialization requires 13int

Scarab Sages

JamesTheDonkey wrote:

The Orc Bloodline bumps it to 3d4+6, since you get +1 per die. The back up plan was to use Ray of Frost. 1d3+2 (1 from orc bloodline, 1 from liquid ice focus) at touch attack seemed to be on par with 1d8 against AC from a light crossbow. Sure, the range is considerably shorter, but in my experience, limited that it is, most rooms are not much larger than 30 feet anyway.

Also, this would be a 0 chronicle sheet character, so I don't have 2 PP to spend on a wand yet.

I am also not a new player. I am relatively new to PFS. My main character just hit 12 XP. I did just come off GM'ing a home game that went weekly for almost 2 and a half years.

I know full well this build is purely for level 1, and that I am intentionally using the the retraining rules. I just want to know if there is a table etiquette against this.

Regarding the wand, I was thinking that you'd get one after the first session.

While staying at level 1 isn't an issue, the main issue I would see is related to the action economy for splitting those magic missiles at multiple targets. The problematic aspect is if your build prevents other players from being able to participate in combat (because you kill the enemy too quickly).

Side note, you might want burning hands instead of color spray so you have a magical option against mindless swarms (which seem to be pretty common for 1st level PFS missions).

Liberty's Edge 4/5

JamesTheDonkey wrote:


Feats: Spell Specialization,

Intellegence 10

Spell Spec requires an INT of 13, unless I missed a different part of your build.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the correction on Spell Specialization. I will amend the character accordingly.

The point about being too deadly for others to have fun is a good one. Especially if I am trying to sucker my friend into playing more. I've had my eye on playing an alchemist for a while now anyway. I'll just roll one of those up and stick this sheet in reserve in case I need to fill a table.

Scarab Sages

JamesTheDonkey wrote:
The point about being too deadly for others to have fun is a good one. Especially if I am trying to sucker my friend into playing more. I've had my eye on playing an alchemist for a while now anyway. I'll just roll one of those up and stick this sheet in reserve in case I need to fill a table.

Though, you could certainly design your character with a personality that would purposely handicap themselves to make the party more cohesive. Lawful and Good for alignment, focusing on the loyalty to allies aspects of lawful, and the desire to enable others to succeed aspect of good.

So, despite being an amazing magic missile character, deliberately fight without magic missile unless the circumstances are dire. Might be tough for certain types of players to not be in the spotlight.

3/5

Around these parts, that build uses Burning Hands instead for 5d4+5 fire damage. Actually, they generally go Cross Blooded adding in Draconic and sling 5d4+10 instead. Don't remember quite what they do to manage the lost caster level from tattooed sorcerer (which IIRC doesn't stack properly with Cross Blooded) 5 flamethrower shots a day that make entire formations just disappear, save or not, plus Disrupt Undead and Acid Splash as cantrips for 'easy' fights.

I've toyed with a Snowball caster doing similar, but the -8 to hit (cover+melee) makes it very difficult to leverage properly.

Scarab Sages

Ryzoken wrote:

Around these parts, that build uses Burning Hands instead for 5d4+5 fire damage. Actually, they generally go Cross Blooded adding in Draconic and sling 5d4+10 instead. Don't remember quite what they do to manage the lost caster level from tattooed sorcerer (which IIRC doesn't stack properly with Cross Blooded) 5 flamethrower shots a day that make entire formations just disappear, save or not, plus Disrupt Undead and Acid Splash as cantrips for 'easy' fights.

I've toyed with a Snowball caster doing similar, but the -8 to hit (cover+melee) makes it very difficult to leverage properly.

Except, he's using it for magic missile, with color spray being his secondary spell in case they get too close. I was suggesting Burning hands, because magic missile can't target swarms and color spray doesn't word on mindless targets. I otherwise agree that color spray is a better spell, but being unable to target a group which is main spell can't harm is a pretty big blind spot.

In this case, he'd cast at +1 caster level since burning hands is also an evocation, but the other things that add caster level would only work on magic missile itself (that trait and spell specialization).

Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

Indeed. You can Ray of Frost a swarm, though. Plus you can assume about 3 more people at the table can also help kill it.

I resolved to play either an alchemist or a hunter, though. Alchemist (Grenadier with Longbow) if the party is light on range, or Hunter (greataxe with tripping small cat) if the party is light on melee.

I want my friend who is going to be playing his first PFS scenario to have fun and feel useful. If I one-shot 90% of the enemies that is unlikely to happen.

5/5 *****

JamesTheDonkey wrote:
Indeed. You can Ray of Frost a swarm, though.

Err, I dont think you can.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario—Kanata

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You are correct. Swarms are immune to any specific target spells. I am learning all sorts of neat stuff from this thread.

Shadow Lodge

JamesTheDonkey wrote:
You are correct. Swarms are immune to any specific target spells. I am learning all sorts of neat stuff from this thread.

Fun fact: you can stab a swarm of tiny creatures, but you can't ray of frost it.

Grand Lodge 2/5

SCPRedMage wrote:
JamesTheDonkey wrote:
You are correct. Swarms are immune to any specific target spells. I am learning all sorts of neat stuff from this thread.
Fun fact: you can stab a swarm of tiny creatures, but you can't ray of frost it.

And in my experience GMs always forget to tell us the size of the swarm.

Shadow Lodge

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I'm annoyed that swarms use the AC size modifier of their component creatures, rather than the size modifier of a large creature, because somehow hitting a group of rats crawling all over each other with a splash weapon is just as difficult is hitting one specific rat.

Scarab Sages

SCPRedMage wrote:
Personally, I'm annoyed that swarms use the AC size modifier of their component creatures, rather than the size modifier of a large creature, because somehow hitting a group of rats crawling all over each other with a splash weapon is just as difficult is hitting one specific rat.

I agree with this statement.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden

SCPRedMage wrote:
Personally, I'm annoyed that swarms use the AC size modifier of their component creatures, rather than the size modifier of a large creature, because somehow hitting a group of rats crawling all over each other with a splash weapon is just as difficult is hitting one specific rat.

Yes, it somewhat puts the lie to the advice of "just throw alchemist's fire at it" if it has 17+ touch AC. For a L1 PC that's steep.

Scarab Sages

I can't wrap my head around what made them describe swarms in terms of a creature taking up four 5-foot squares, then have to add in extra rules, to explain how you adjudicate that.
Rather than statting them up as single-square swarms to begin with.

Dark Archive 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

It's completely legal. If your play group gets in knots about it, don't fret; awesome other play groups are out there :-)

The Exchange 4/5

I don't see anything wrong, but again I see first level (since I'll play evergreen scenarios only for 1st level characters), to do all kinds of weird expermentation. Kinda crappy when you use resources(scenarios) and end up with stuff that doesn't work out.

FOR SCIENCE!

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate how people throw terms like cheese.

Are you having fun?
Are you making the game more fun for those playing with you?

Those are the two questions you need to be yes. The rest honestly does not matter much.


JamesTheDonkey wrote:

I convinced a a friend to play PFS with me this coming week, and I am starting a new character to play along side him. However I am unsure what exactly I want to play come level 2.

At the moment, I have a spec'ed out a level 1 sorceress that specializes in magic missiles (+4 CL for MM, +1 damage per die). Even if I played this character past 1st level, I wouldn't be playing it this focused, or with these stats.

I am relatively new to PFS, so is this design based on the free rebuilding is considered a breach of etiquette?

It's considered abuse that campaign management did not intend by making this available.

3/5

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
JamesTheDonkey wrote:

I convinced a a friend to play PFS with me this coming week, and I am starting a new character to play along side him. However I am unsure what exactly I want to play come level 2.

At the moment, I have a spec'ed out a level 1 sorceress that specializes in magic missiles (+4 CL for MM, +1 damage per die). Even if I played this character past 1st level, I wouldn't be playing it this focused, or with these stats.

I am relatively new to PFS, so is this design based on the free rebuilding is considered a breach of etiquette?

It's considered abuse that campaign management did not intend by making this available.

Where did they say this?

The Exchange 5/5

Snorter wrote:

I can't wrap my head around what made them describe swarms in terms of a creature taking up four 5-foot squares, then have to add in extra rules, to explain how you adjudicate that.

Rather than statting them up as single-square swarms to begin with.

(Bolding mine) Please expand on the bolded statement. I do not beleave that (in PFS sources) "swarms are described as a creature taking up four 5-foot squares."

Swarm Subtype states that: "A single swarm occupies a square (if it made up of nonflying creatures) or a cube (of flying creatures) 10 feet on a side, but it's reach is 0 feet."

Many judges (incorrectly) treat swarms as 4 independent shapeable 5' squares (almost sub creatures).

Here's another thread that goes into it in detail - so as not to derail this one...

5/5 *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
Many judges (incorrectly) treat swarms as 4 independent shapeable 5' squares (almost sub creatures).

Many GM's, entirely correctly, treat swarms as shapeable on the basis that the swarm type says that you can do so providing they remain contiguous.

The Exchange 5/5

andreww wrote:
nosig wrote:
Many judges (incorrectly) treat swarms as 4 independent shapeable 5' squares (almost sub creatures).
Many GM's, entirely correctly, treat swarms as shapeable on the basis that the swarm type says that you can do so providing they remain contiguous.

Warning - serious thread derail ahead! (Sorry!)

There is several things wrong with your statement above... Most of them covered in detail in the thread I linked too... But the one that stands out the most is that the swarm type does NOT say that swarms are shapeable "providing they remain contiguous" - in fact it says something close to that, but only in reference to Large swarms (which are made up of more than one normal swarm) and even then it says "The area occupied by a large swarm is completely shapeable, though the swarm usually remains in contiguous squares" ...

Many judges , entirely incorrectly, treat a normal swarm as shapeable when in the description it says that larger swarms are shapeable.... Which is covered in the tread I linked to. Feel free to review it there. But here's the important text....

From the Bestiary write up. Here's the entire paragraph...

A swarm of Tiny creatures consists of 300 nonflying creatures or 1,000 flying creatures. A swarm of Diminutive creatures consists of 1,500 nonflying creatures or 5,000 flying creatures. A swarm of Fine creatures consists of 10,000 creatures, whether they are flying or not. Swarms of nonflying creatures include many more creatures than could normally fit in a 10-foot square based on their normal space, because creatures in a swarm are packed tightly together and generally crawl over each other and their prey when moving or attacking. Larger swarms are represented by multiples of single swarms. The area occupied by a large swarm is completely shapeable, though the swarm usually remains in contiguous squares. (Bolding mine)

If we take the last sentence out of context (as I think you are doing, and some other judges do), we could assume that a swarm that is 10' to a side (as all normal swarms are) is being referenced, and is being called a "large swarm". The problem with this, is the little "l" in the sentence. It is the same little "l" that we would refer to a Dire rat as a large rat (which is size Small) rather than a Large rat (which would be a creature 10' to a side). It would also imply that there are such things as Huge swarms and Medium swarms and even Small swarms when there are not.

If we take the last two sentences together though we can see that a large swarm is represented by multiple single swarms (which are all 10' to a side), and that it is this larger swarm that is completely shapeable, though the larger swarm usually remains in contiguous squares (squares that are 10' to a side and are the multiple single swarms that it is made up of). They (the multiple normal swarms that make up the large swarm) usually remain contiguous - but they don't have to. Each 10' square CAN move off on it's own and attack different targets...

if the two lines...
"Larger swarms are represented by multiples of single swarms. The area occupied by a large swarm is completely shapeable, though the swarm usually remains in contiguous squares."

are split apart and taken out of context, then you could use the line ...

"...The area occupied by a large swarm is completely shapeable, though the swarm usually remains in contiguous squares."

...to split the swarm into 4 "Medium" swarms that could all move about NOT in contiguous squares. "usually" would mean "not always".

A judge could then have each 1/4 swarm attack PCs separated by more than 30' each. How will we track HP for each piece? Esp. if you have more than one of these "split swarms"... 8 or 12 or 16 little 1/4 swarms attacking in different locations - which ones connect with which other ones?

(I am not even going to talk about the judges who stack swarms in the same spot... I fear seeing 4 quarter swarms all stacking in the same 5' square to do 4 times the damage and 4 distraction rolls...)

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

The only thing I have been able to determine for sure regarding swarms is that there is an ample amount of table variation regarding their implementation. While I can certainly understand your examination of how the contiguous aspect works, I disagree with the analysis. Many believe that those sentences are not necessarily related to the same point of thought, rather more bullet-point-like things to take into account when dealing with a swarm. I tend to believe that a single 10x10 swarm can change shape extending itself into any four squares as long as they remain continuous. It would be difficult to "move through cracks or holes large enough for its component creatures" if it absolutely had to maintain a 10x10 shape. I think it would be very odd if a swarm was denied the ability to travel down a pipe or similar passage due to an interpretation of what contiguous means.

I disagree that a swarm is simply a diminutive (or whatever) swarm. IMO, that is an incomplete description. Swarms are special and modify or outright break "normal" rules. I believe the RAI is that since the swarm is treated as a single creature and occupies a 10x10 space, it effectively IS a large creature.

I do agree that they cannot divide into four medium-sized individual swarms.

And while I agree "stacking" multiple swarms on top of each other is scary and something I don't think I would do, I think there still seems to be enough ambiguity in the text to allow such a thing.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's not derail the thread any further; if you want to add anything, go to the linked page.
More people will get the benefit of our combined wisdom, over there.

Scarab Sages

Though if I were to be mischievous, I might ask "How many discarded level 1 character builds would constitute a swarm"?.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I tend to retain the general gist of the character in my free retrains. Melee character stays in melee, be it a Ninja or a Ghost Rider. And their story remains the same, since throwaway characters egg me.

Except that one time I played a criminal who upon the closing of the scenario was arrested by the final version of the character, my Order of the Torrent signifer.

Besides that little self-made rule, I like to take advantage of the free retrain to try new classes: My stonelord was a bard, an oracle and a normal paladin before ending up hard as rock.

1 to 50 of 51 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Is it bad form to play a 1st level-only character? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.