Back our Kickstarter Campaign going on Now
  1. #1

    Thoughts on the Playtest?

    What does everyone think of the Playtest? Is it an improvement over 1st edition? Does it need a lot of work still? I've read through some of the rulebook but haven't had a chance to actually put anything into practice.

  2. #2
    Ampersandrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Belfast, Northern Ireland
    Posts
    142
    Some things are better, but in my opinion it still needs major work.

    I think monster ACs and saves are too high, but that's tunable.

    It may just be the play test, but they seem to have thrown out balanced scenarios.

    I love the three action system.

    I'm not so keen on the loss of attacks of opportunity.

    I'm not a fan of ancestries, they're better than the first version, but still not great. A dwarf used to be resistant to magic, resistant to poison and really hard to move. Now you pick one of those.

    Resonance is s**t! it needs to die in a fire. They're fixing something that a lot of players don't think is a problem.

  3. #3
    My group began with Doomsday Dawn, and decided after Sombrefell that we liked it enough to start a new campaign with the existing rules.

    I do agree that the monster stats seem strange, basically a little too balanced. I don't think every level 1 creature needs to have the same + to hit and damage etc (that's how it seems anyways). Also not a fan of a lot of automatic extra effects monsters do by just hitting, like knocking you down and dragging you around.

    We love the 3 action system, and most of the basic mechanics. We also like the how they did spells (action economy) and variable effects like Heal. Anything I currently don't like I'll just houserule.

    What I want out of this version is a crunchier version of D&D 5E or a more streamlined version of 3.5/PF 1E. More options for characters, good amount of treasure rewards, without the game becoming crazy and cumbersome at high levels. What I'm seeing on paper is a good attempt but I won't know if it's successful till high level play.

    FYI check out the resonance rework rules (being tested outside of Doomsday Dawn, see the paizo blog post about it). Those rules are MUCH better.

  4. #4
    Our campaign groups have enjoyed it a lot, actually. I didn't think I could get my 5E players interested in Pathfinder again but the Playtest has hooked them (in fact, we played 6 out of the last 7 nights).

    3 Action/1 Reaction system is a winner. No doubt about that. They are actually enjoying the reduction in AoO as it was terribly bogging and created a tactical game feel to PF1. This way, there's uncertainty and mystery to what creatures might do. The ability to mix and match actions, even use multiple cantrips (like Daze) in a round is great. So much about this has contributed to the Narration of the game much better than PF1 where it felt more like Chess.

    Resonance was okay. Now this group isn't at all into power-gaming/optimization or min-max that is replete in PF1 and they've come from the 5E (for the most part) Attunement system. They were never ones to carry around stacks of CLW staves, so it felt reasonable and the changes seem to make it even more adaptable.

    The changes to non-magic healing (Treat Wounds) has really worked well, contributed to the narration. So has using Perception and (my interpretation) of the exploration mode where it seamlessly flows into combat without the immersion breaking "roll for initiative" start. We have one of the 3 campaign groups that is completely healer free.

    It has some rough edges, though. Trenloe here has made tracking conditions so much easier but still a bit clumsy. Level 0 creatures high hit rate feels rough, but the groups haven't found that to be too terrible. Creatures and their different traits has been well received in general.

    Some classes and actions, feats and skills, really need smoothing out and balancing, but that's not too surprising in a playtest. Remember D&D Next? So far, the errata has dealt with some of the issues, including the mess that was Alchemists to start.

    All-in-all, we are enjoying it. I have converted an AD&D module, part of a PF1 AP, and run the Doomsday Dawn... all have been fun for the players. It was terribly awkward at first when we had to look up so much, by right now, it's everyone favorite game. I have a PF1 AP we haven't played in weeks and a 5E Ravenloft campaign that's completely stalled out, despite asking if they want to do either. Not to mention we went from 1 fixed night a week to being asked if we can play each night (including tonight - what was a no, heh).
    Ultimate License Owner since 2011 and FG GM since 2008
    Game Systems: 5E, Pathfinder, Starfinder, Call of Cthulhu, RoleMaster, C&C, Pathfinder 2

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    2,804
    Not much time to write a detailed review, but we love it, and, in general, I agree with everything ShadeRaven said. We only played the 1st Doomsday Dawn and are about to launch into a converted Rise of the Runelords.

  6. #6
    Liking a lot too. Agree with ShadeRaven

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in