Playtest Thoughts: Week 2

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

The Advanced Class Guide Playtest continues to roll along and the design team has been getting some great feedback from the boards. It's been a busy week; we've made changes to the arcanist, launched the playtest survey, and stuffed ourselves on Thanksgiving. This week, we'll take a look at those in detail and cast an eye toward the upcoming revisions.

Late in the day on Wednesday, we released a revised version of the arcanist, swapping out the blood focus class feature for a new mechanic designed to give the class flexibility along with a clearer and better sense of role in the game. The arcanist gained an arcane reservoir that she can draw upon to fuel exploits (special class features that let her tinker with the forces of magic). She can consume her own spell slots to fill up her reservoir and can even learn to siphon such power from magic items and enemy spells. If you have not seen the update, forums right go to the forum post here. We aren't done with this class quite yet, but it's a step in the right direction.

The other big news last week was the launch of the playtest surveys. Each class has its own questionnaire, allowing us the gauge their interest, power, and versatility. The great thing is that you can update the survey as the playtest continues, meaning that we can see how opinions and ideas for each class change as time goes on. This also means it is vital for you to fill out your survey now, so that when you change it later, we can get a sense of whether or not we are heading in the right direction. You can find the surveys right here. Of special note, please base your arcanist survey answers off the original version of the class, not the revised version on the messageboards.

Let's take this chance to share some feedback from the survey. We asked the same eight questions about each of the classes, and we found some interesting trends.

The first two questions are about comparing each class with its two parent base classes. For example, the shaman questions compare the shaman to the oracle and the witch. Most of the classes are falling relatively close to their parents, but there are some outliers. The original version of the arcanist is seen as being more powerful than its parents, but I think the revision will normalize those numbers a bit. On the other hand, people are seeing the skald as being a bit weaker than its parents. The big winner here was the shaman, which most feel is pretty close to the mark as compared to its parent classes.

Next up, we ask whether the theme of the class matches its mechanics. The bloodrager and slayer were the big winners here, while the hunter and the warpriest need some work.

Our fourth question looks at how each class is presented in terms of clarity and ease of use. The slayer once again comes out on top here, along with the investigator. Interestingly, this is the only question in which the shaman gets some poor marks—understandable considering how the spirit and wandering spirit mechanic plays out.

Next, we ask you two questions: one comparing the class in terms of power and balance to the other playtest classes, and another comparing it to all of the other classes in the game. The shaman and skald once again show that they need some work in this department, while the brawler, investigator, shaman, and slayer are all falling closer to the mark.

The seventh question asks whether the class has enough options and versatility. The head of class here is the bloodrager, investigator, and shaman. At the other end, it's clear that the skald and swashbuckler need a few more options added to their frameworks.

Finally, we look to gauge your interest in playing the class. Not surprisingly, the bloodrager, investigator, shaman, and swashbuckler are all pretty high on the list. The hunter, skald, and warpriest are lagging behind, which is key feedback.

What all does this tell us? First off, that some of the classes are getting close to where they need to be. They're not done, and they still need a lot of polish and refinement, but they probably don't need any major revisions. Others need to see some big changes to get them closer to the standard we're striving for. We aren't basing mechanical decisions solely off survey responses, but it will help us understand how our upcoming changes impact the consensus opinion.

And that brings me to my final point: barring any catastrophes, we are hoping to release a revised version of the playtest document sometime in the next week. Once we release that document, we will be calling on folks to update their surveys as soon as they have gotten a chance to read through them and run them out for a test drive. Remember, the surveys and playtest forums will remain open through Tuesday, December 17th.

Thanks again for taking part! We'll see you on the boards.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Playtest
51 to 80 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Cheapy wrote:
Arae Garven wrote:
Roberta Yang wrote:
Did you manage to figure out a way to give the Swashbuckler access to Weapon Finesse at "the appropriate level"?
I cannot help but utter an evil snicker every time I read this. I should probably go see a psychologist or something.
Nah, you're not the one who needs to go see a psychologist.

Oh, oh, it's me, right??? /Crazyvoice


The nice men in white coats say they will only give me my medication if I make at least one flippant comment on the internet per day.

Well, that's today's quota finished, see ya

Grand Lodge

Just as soon as I can find time I'll get a playtest going.

Paizo Employee Lead Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

To be clear folks,

We are not basing any design decisions off the survey results. We are using the surveys as a sort of moving metric to how we are doing with the design. When we rerelease the playtest document, I think we will some very useful data in how the changes affect opinion. That is the real value of the survey.

As usual, we are taking a blend of messageboard feedback, survey results, playtest data, and our own design philosophies to help guide us in this process. Although its had its rough patches, this has been one of the most productive playtests to date.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Have to say I'm massively surprised that people are happy with the shaman. It feels weak mechanically, bears little resemblance to witch or oracle and has a real disadvantage in a super-shiny familiar that screams "IM MAGIC KILL ME NOW"

It also has the biggest imbalance between options - seriously, Life gets channel and earth gets DR/5 Adamantine for the familiar.

The thing that upsets me most is that fluff-wise the shaman has *the* most potential to be a cool and (most importantly) unique new class.

Sigh ... I guess if the survey says...

Scarab Sages

Dancingweasel wrote:

Have to say I'm massively surprised that people are happy with the shaman. It feels weak mechanically, bears little resemblance to witch or oracle and has a real disadvantage in a super-shiny familiar that screams "IM MAGIC KILL ME NOW"

It also has the biggest imbalance between options - seriously, Life gets channel and earth gets DR/5 Adamantine for the familiar.

The thing that upsets me most is that fluff-wise the shaman has *the* most potential to be a cool and (most importantly) unique new class.

Sigh ... I guess if the survey says...

The Shaman didn't feel weak mechanically at all to me. I thought it wa actually the playtest class least in need of improvement. My only gripe was that it shared a problem also seen with the Bloodrager, in that some of its options were just vastly superior mechanically to others (like your example of the variation in power between Life and Earth).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The thing which vexes me most is that I have little motivation to playtest the old versions of the classes (I even spent a few hours creating level thirteen versions for four of them) and when we get the updated playtest, there will be so little time to actually do some playtesting before the closing date of December 17th.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dancingweasel wrote:

Have to say I'm massively surprised that people are happy with the shaman. It feels weak mechanically, bears little resemblance to witch or oracle and has a real disadvantage in a super-shiny familiar that screams "IM MAGIC KILL ME NOW"

It also has the biggest imbalance between options - seriously, Life gets channel and earth gets DR/5 Adamantine for the familiar.

The thing that upsets me most is that fluff-wise the shaman has *the* most potential to be a cool and (most importantly) unique new class.

Sigh ... I guess if the survey says...

I think the problems the Shaman has are not really going to show up on the survey. The core mechanics are fine, but it really needs a bit more polish across the board. Like the "Do you think the theme and mechanics of the CLASSNAME compliment each other?" question. This is my second-biggest issue with the class, but my honest answer is "about a 4." It's just slightly off, but that slightly off is really, really loud. My biggest issue with the class, the intra-class imbalance (and occasional just-not-working-ness), doesn't show up anywhere on the survey.

It really is close to where it need, but there's some roughness that really needs to be ironed out that the survey isn't catching. Especially in comparison to some of the other classes, I'm not surprised it turned out on top.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Majuba wrote:

The surveys better measure the broad opinions of the playtesting audience.

The forums better measure the intensity of those opinions.

In other words, you could have outraged threads about, say, the Slayer, but the surveys only show a blip. That would be a vocal minority. Worth listening to, since they care so much, but should be taken in measure to assign emphasis. I'm not sure who wins in a vocal minority vs. a silent majority (in the assigning of revision efforts).

I think part of the problem people are having with the Slayer is that isn't not really Slayer-y. Really the class should be renamed Stalker, it fits the mechanics of the class far better than Slayer does as the class stands currently.


+1 to that.


Marc Radle wrote:

Excellent point, Majuba. All too often a small handful of people on a message board (here on Paizo.com or anywhere else, really) can make a LOT OF NOISE about a given opinion and make it feel like there are many people voicing that thought, while a great many folks who don't bother posting may actually feel the exact opposite.

These surveys are valuable because, while that small,but LOUD vocal minority can post the same thing over and over, they can each only fill out the survey once. So, the surveys, in theory at least, give a more accurate account of what everyone thinks since each person's survey results have equal 'weight'

This applies equally to Less Lawful, More Good's and Majuba's as well as your post Marc. Did you guys see where I said this:

Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Personally I feel the Slayer needs a considerable revamp, and there seems to be some groundswell on that, but that may just be me and a few others with a peeve. Survey appears to show people are happy with the Slayer.

I'm well aware of LOUD minorities obfuscating the discussion. I also have a healthy distrust of statistical analysis.

@Jason Buhlman: thanks for the post - that clarifies the mix you are using and the approach taken. I'm really interested in making sure any glaring errors or great critiques in Hybrid-specific threads or playtest threads ARE acted upon.


I've added my two copper on a few of the classes, but I'm impressed with the playtest itself. Paizo is getting a lot of good feedback from a lot of players. I've also added my two copper on playtesting on products for WotC and White Wolf, who usually use a few playtest groups GMed by developers. Paizo requests and uses a lot of player feedback for everything, and they've gone above and beyond in the playtest department. There's a good business strategy in involving as many players as possible (a lot of players will buy a book they gave input on), and it makes for a (imo) better product, but impressive still. The Paizo staff are putting a lot of time into this.


Majuba wrote:

The surveys better measure the broad opinions of the playtesting audience.

The forums better measure the intensity of those opinions.

In other words, you could have outraged threads about, say, the Slayer, but the surveys only show a blip. That would be a vocal minority. Worth listening to, since they care so much, but should be taken in measure to assign emphasis. I'm not sure who wins in a vocal minority vs. a silent majority (in the assigning of revision efforts).

This brings up a point actually- The next round of surveys could stand to have a question added for "Did you actually attempt to play this class in an actual game?" A lot of the issues that should still need hammering out next round are really hard to gauge just reading a PDF, like how arcanists filling their pools back up works in practice, or how skalds actually work in various sorts of parties.

Liberty's Edge

A question I would like to know the answer to:

Would you like to meet this class as the BBG in a PFS scenario?


EricMcG wrote:

A question I would like to know the answer to:

Would you like to meet this class as the BBG in a PFS scenario?

The problem with this is that you don't know why someo0ne likes a class as BBEG. If player 1 chooses the warpriest as favourite BBEG because the class is nicely weak and another chooses the arcanist because he likes challenging fights but you don't know why they did choose as they did it serves you little.

@dancingweasle: Of the classes I took a good look at, to me the shaman looked the strongest. Those classes being: Bloodrager, warpriest, brawler, inquisitor and shaman.

Dark Archive

Marc Radle wrote:

These surveys are valuable because, while that small,but LOUD vocal minority can post the same thing over and over, they can each only fill out the survey once. So, the surveys, in theory at least, give a more accurate account of what everyone thinks since each person's survey results have equal 'weight'

Jason, Sean, Stephen and company are smart people - I'm sure they use utilize all the the worthwhile data (survey results, forum posts etc) during these playtests :)

Hm, well said, Marc and Majuba. I have to admit I've been pretty loud about the "flaws" in the slayer class, posting the same issues on several threads. It's quite possible that the majority of people do not share my opinion.

Yeah, I should probably trust Jason et al. in polishing up these classes. I've been suspicious before, and Paizo has proved my doubts wrong every time.

But I'm a cranky grognard; I have to use every opportunity I get to whine and gripe about "bad" design! ;)


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Personally I feel the Slayer needs a considerable revamp, and there seems to be some groundswell on that, but that may just be me and a few others with a peeve. Survey appears to show people are happy with the Slayer

I think the Slayer needs 3 things.

2 more skill points.

More talents.

A fix to the effectiveness 'donut hole' that appears at level 6 and continues through level 9. If the player wants to try two weapon combat or rapid shot archery it only gets worse.

I have bigger problems with the Swashbuckler myself, and the response of 'looking into ways to get the class weapon finesse at the 'appropriate level." This is just an opinion, but the appropriate level is ONE. Waiting even one additional level to start performing the basic functions as intended is too late for a base class, especially when the fluff lists that direction as standard.


Has anybody given thought to how the Arcanist Exploits work with the spell Transformation?

Dark Archive

I might of missed it but is there an up date to the Playtest class stuff yet avaible for download?


Not yet DracoGoliathe.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Too bad the updated pdf can't be out this week. I migth have used it today for my Pathfinger session.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheLoneCleric wrote:
Too bad the updated pdf can't be out this week. I migth have used it today for my Pathfinger session.

I.... I'm not sure what to think about "Pathfinger session", but it seems like something someone should feel a little bad about....

j/k! :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't listen to him. No-one should ever feel bad about their pathfingering!

Just remember, you are a beautiful person!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Pathfinger Society allows for organized Pathfingering with like-minded individuals.

Explore! Report! Cooperate!

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Sammy T wrote:
Explore! Report! Cooperate!

I shudder to think what is meant by these in the context of Pathfingering.


Come see Pathfinger!

Eando Kline is Back In Action!

In Ioun Stone Technicolor!

Coming soon from Metro-Golarion-Mayer Studios!


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I checked my downloads, the blog, and still no update. :(


"Pathfinger", so many things wrong with that word:)

Liberty's Edge

How many people took the survey to provide the results mentioned in this blog ?

Did more people took the survey since then ? (I know I did)

Did that cause some noteworthy changes in the results ?

In fact, would it be possible to have access to the detailed results ?

Also, were there some interesting trends in the answers to the more open questions of the General Feedback survey ?


They mention some survey results in the podcast I think?

51 to 80 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Class Guide Playtest / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Playtest Thoughts: Week 2 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion