Starting characters and low-level monsters


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I must say, level 1 player characters don't feel much like level 1 characters.

Compared to most editions of dndish games, you start out with lots more hit points. Martial characters gain many more attacks. And monsters present comparatively little threat.

My impression is that any monster of level 1 or below is much more of a speedbump than I'm used to.

If you don't start with a Goblin themed scenario straight away, you've pretty much missed the window of opportunity - already at level 2, fighting these creatures change character from where you consider them individually dangerous to nuisances except in larger groups.

That makes me a bit sad. There are a lot of Level -1 and 0 and 1 monsters in the Bestiary: Goblins, Kobolds, Skeletons, Zombies are all staples of low-level adventures, but unless you manage to engage your heroes while they remain first level, such scenarios written for previous editions likely won't work as envisioned (since "four goblins" will cease to be anything but a trivial speedbump).

A NPC from a PF1 module could be described as hating Goblins, and that he managed to kill eight of them during a recent raid. Thing is, in PF2, that describes not a moderately powerful hero of local repute - it describes a completely fresh level 1 character (of a martial class)...

In short: it makes me wonder about how rules for "level 0" characters would look like, prolonging the low-level experience where these critters must be taken seriously even in a 1:1 fight.

What do you think? Is this something particular to Pathfinder (and even a good thing), or an unfortunate side effect of the new ruleset?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zapp wrote:

I must say, level 1 player characters don't feel much like level 1 characters.

Compared to most editions of dndish games, you start out with lots more hit points. Martial characters gain many more attacks. And monsters present comparatively little threat.

My impression is that any monster of level 1 or below is much more of a speedbump than I'm used to.

If you don't start with a Goblin themed scenario straight away, you've pretty much missed the window of opportunity - already at level 2, fighting these creatures change character from where you consider them individually dangerous to nuisances except in larger groups.

That makes me a bit sad. There are a lot of Level -1 and 0 and 1 monsters in the Bestiary: Goblins, Kobolds, Skeletons, Zombies are all staples of low-level adventures, but unless you manage to engage your heroes while they remain first level, such scenarios written for previous editions likely won't work as envisioned (since "four goblins" will cease to be anything but a trivial speedbump).

A NPC from a PF1 module could be described as hating Goblins, and that he managed to kill eight of them during a recent raid. Thing is, in PF2, that describes not a moderately powerful hero of local repute - it describes a completely fresh level 1 character (of a martial class)...

In short: it makes me wonder about how rules for "level 0" characters would look like, prolonging the low-level experience where these critters must be taken seriously even in a 1:1 fight.

What do you think? Is this something particular to Pathfinder (and even a good thing), or an unfortunate side effect of the new ruleset?

I think the idea is for you to bump up or empower these creatures.

They all fit the themes of traditional level 1-5 adventures, and can be bumped around in power to fit in there relatively easily. Even on the fly as you get more comfortable.

That said, for me part of the fantasy of kobolds and skeltons is not them being individually scary, but rather specifically them appearing in bunches that outnumber you. Occasionally with a big/powerful ally among the group.

If you prefer to have them as more significant threats, do so! There are rules in the Bestiary for some scaling, and you can bump numbers in a reasonable way too.


vagrant-poet wrote:

I think the idea is for you to bump up or empower these creatures.

They all fit the themes of traditional level 1-5 adventures, and can be bumped around in power to fit in there relatively easily. Even on the fly as you get more comfortable.

Thank you but I am aware I can change things if I want to - I wanted to discuss the default power level of these creatures relative to player characters right out the starting gate.

In short: I think something has changed.

Do you agree it has?
Why do you think that is so? (Just a side effect or intentional shift?)
Do you like it?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I like it. My wizard not being in peril of incidental one hit kills is a marked improvement.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I like default being pretty low for a wide range of common early level monsters. The same party probably doesn’t need to fight every low level monster on their path to level 20. Save some for next time. Another possibility is to slow down the xp track if you want to draw out level 1.

Also, it seems pretty straight forward to have level 0 be just AB and no class for a couple of fights, with the party starting out with a couple of staves or Spears and gaining their starting wealth in the first couple encounters.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A bit of self-promotion on my part, but it's worth noting that the TRAILseeker Patreon has guidelines for 0-level play already.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I always felt, in PF1 and D&D3.5, that the first couple of levels were sacrificial. Not just in power level, but character. Any reasonable backstory for somebody who's voluntarily setting out on an adventure inevitably describes somebody who's at least level 3, in order for their skills, feats etc to line up with what the character should have. The new heritage and background setup does a lot to fix that.

It seems like PF2 characters just start at a more sensible level.


Charlie Brooks wrote:
A bit of self-promotion on my part, but it's worth noting that the TRAILseeker Patreon has guidelines for 0-level play already.

Since any guidelines could probably be summarized in a single paragraph, no I would not agree it is worth noting that you ask for money to cover this simple concept.

I'd just not pick the class stage of character creation.

Basically, you have whatever you got from your Ancestry and Background. No class hit points and no class feats. You still have three actions.

Even Level -1 monsters could be scary now!


Anyways: I didn't ask for solutions - I wanted to ask you what you thought of the change.

Personally, I'm not sure I like it. A quick level-up and whoosh - there goes all the bloodseeker and centipede encounters out the window!

I guess my question is:

Okay so they gave everybody more hit points to start with. Fine.

But shouldn't they then have boosted low-level monsters too?

It appears Giant Rats and Goblin Warriors have been effectively demoted, relative to player characters. Was that an intentional change, you think? Or maybe just a happenstance or even a mistake?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Zapp wrote:

Anyways: I didn't ask for solutions - I wanted to ask you what you thought of the change.

Personally, I'm not sure I like it. A quick level-up and whoosh - there goes all the bloodseeker and centipede encounters out the window!

I guess my question is:

Okay so they gave everybody more hit points to start with. Fine.

But shouldn't they then have boosted low-level monsters too?

It appears Giant Rats and Goblin Warriors have been effectively demoted, relative to player characters. Was that an intentional change, you think? Or maybe just a happenstance or even a mistake?

They fill their role perfectly fine in my eyes. A goblin warrior still hits your average level 1 character somewhere between a 9-11 and the guidelines suggest that a standard encounter should have between 4 and 6 of them (for a 4 man party.) And without having to do any homebrew you have Goblins upto level 2 meaning they are still expected cannon fodder all the way up to level 6.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zapp wrote:
Charlie Brooks wrote:
A bit of self-promotion on my part, but it's worth noting that the TRAILseeker Patreon has guidelines for 0-level play already.
Since any guidelines could probably be summarized in a single paragraph, no I would not agree it is worth noting that you ask for money to cover this simple concept.

That's an assumption you are having.

If you're not interested in someone's work then that''s that, don't begrudge them for getting/paid tipped for their work.


I don't understand the issue. Goblins were CR1/3 in PF...
And I find Goblin Warriors to be far more in line with what you expect from them in PF2 than in PF.

Let's make a quick comparison:
Both goblins have 16 AC.
Both have 6 hit points. Considering damage is inferior in PF2, they are a bit tougher (but they will certainly die in one hit anyway).
PF2 Goblins have +5 average saves. PF1 Goblins have +1. Considering the difference in save DC, PF2 goblins have higher saves by +2, but low level spells are stronger in PF2.
PF2 goblins have +4 to hit, with quite a few damage. PF1 goblins have +2 to hit and less damage. So, players are having far more hit points, but goblin are hitting more easily and deal more damage. That's the biggest difference, PF1 goblins are nearly never hiting anyone with a good AC.

So, to me, they look similar in terms of expectation. And I think they are more balanced in PF2.

Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zapp wrote:
(since "four goblins" will cease to be anything but a trivial speedbump).

If 4 regular CR 1/3 Goblins were more than a speedbump to a Level 2 PF1 party, then that party had built their characters very poorly.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Starting characters and low-level monsters All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.