John Whyte's page

The Absalom book was a large setting book like the Mwangi and Impossible Lands ones.

It was also over a year late, if memory serves. I don't know that it should be the benchmark for any other city book.

As a casual follower of the Lost Omens line I'd assumed this book was a big hardcover like Absalom, Mwangi, and Impossible Lands.

I'm suprised it's not. I was hoping that the large setting books wouldn't follow the 10 areas in the World Guide so closely.

Is the World guide going to be big (a la Impossible lands) or smaller (a la Inner Sea World Guide?)

I haven't seen the announcement, is there a link?

I think we can assume Moiraine and Thom's relationship is not going to happen. It was always contrived as hell in the books and never made sense, and the letter was nice but there was no foundation to it; Thom and Moiraine barely spent any time together at all. That's why they simply continued Moiraine and Siuan's relationship from when they were novices.

I'd assumed the relationship developed whilst the main trio were off screen in books 1, 3, and 4.

Siuans later book relationship was pretty kick-butt so maybe it won't happen and they'll keep the Siuan-Morrainne pairing.

Big WOT fan, kept away from anything on the internet as to not spoil things.

Overall I enjoyed the season. But I have some minor and major complaints.

My major one is Thom, Thom is awesome. Thom however doesn't get enough screentime. But more importantly Thoms letter from the books and his relationship with Morraine trigger one of the best section of fiction. But book 1 + 4 are his times to build a relationship with Morraine and he hasn't met her yet.

The other semi major one is Nyneave and Lan, I was so looking forward to her disparaging comments about Rand and Matts relationships and the sniffing and hair pulling, but she can't do that now.

The minor ones - Morraine +The Amirlyn seat being lovers. Because their relationship is very strong and loving but in a years time in the books they need to develop strong feelings for other characters and if that happens it'll be jarring.

Overall I felt the series focused a bit much on fast paced 'cool' rather than solidly developing character relationships. The best relationships were Logain w all channellers, Morraine with Lan, and Morraine and Leandrin.

I have thoughts about the season finale but I won't discuss it yet.

I don't mean to come across as cold or unfeeling, John, but you aren't even bothering to look into what "the liker" said, or ask what the post actually contained, before condemning us as abusive and cruel. That's not responsible, kind, or respectful. You seem very comfortable assuming the worst of us. That's not a good attitude to bring into this discussion.

Just as a minor response,

- given the post was deleted before I saw it, I'd consider it bad form (and in some forums strikable) to ask what it said. I mean I could pm someone I the hope you have an idetic memory or screenshots but that's a little creepy.

- I rather deliberately didn't mention names, in no small part that the stock standard avatars here have confused me in the past, as is the ability to create alt accounts.

- I also was vague because a lot of my post is feeling, and I know posts vanish via moderators. I didn't want to have to drag through citations.

- I'm however going to say a little bit more, one of the above posters said that the poster in question has a history of single line transphobic comments. As I'm an intermittent lurker outside USA I will say I've never seen such a post (likely because moderation hit them before my eyes). Which is like.... beyond horrific that such a poster isn't banned.

vagrant-poet wrote:

Shisumo wrote:

John Whyte wrote:

Strength of Thousands arrived earlier this week, and I agree the information about the npcs is woeful. Compare it to Souls for Smugglers Shiv, where the npcs are placed together, in one section, in a more structured and less meandering way.

This made my jaw drop. I thought the NPC section in Kindled Magic was the best and most useful such article I've ever seen in a Paizo product.

Same, it's got the best NPC section for a long time.

Yeah, curious what he meant by that. There's a section for the students and another that has the villains and one teacher, which doesn't seem too bad.

The only real problem I see is that there isn't much on the other teachers, who I think are pushed off to a later module.

I was meaning that the AP has a head cook, and four (?) key teachers who clearly seem like they should be reoccurring NPCs in the adventure (and later on in the path) who are given a meandering set of paragraphs on the without any real structure. I was sort of expecting them to be in the back of the book (although you are right they could be in the back of another book). So when they crop up again during the adventure it's page flipping time, both during prep and play.

You are correct there is the student npc collection, which is fine, but it doesn't (within that section) link itself back to the adventure. Anchor-Roots description includes playing music from the city, but not her uncomfortable relationship with a teacher.

The information is there, but it takes serious prep to collate it, then use it. It's easy to read, and imaginatively gripping, but it doesn't make running the adventure easier.

As a GM I want to say not only are Paizo's adventures difficult to prep with, and they are getting worse.

Strength of Thousands arrived earlier this week, and I agree the information about the npcs is woeful. Compare it to Souls for Smugglers Shiv, where the npcs are placed together, in one section, in a more structured and less meandering way.

A number of other adventures are working to make their adventures usable during play, and easier to recall the information. It's often quicker for me to convert another adventure that priorities usability than to prep 0-5 year old Paizo adventure.

I want to chime in here. I'm a big Pathfinder fan. I was excited by the announcement of the Pathfinder playtest. I preordered the rulebook and the adventure.

From everything I (thought) I heard this was going to be a Beta testing, with an actual adventure. Plus it was meant to answer one of my favorite mysteries, the countdown clock.

From the teaser blog posts it was apparent the system wouldn't be backwards compatible. Certainly not my preference but still pretty stoked.

Then I got the rulebook and the adventure. And it becomes obvious it's not a Beta test, rather it is what I'd consider a 'focus test' where a whole assorted number of 'brainstormed ideas' are put out for testing with a view to refining it further. The adventure wasn't what I would call a 'proper adventure' but rather a selection of (sometimes extreme) set pieces. Not something my players would enjoy.

Then the rulebook itself was dense, complex, subject to weekly updates, and there wasn't a player aid of "If you play PF1 here are the quickstart rules". I couldn't bring myself to learn a thick crunchy system well enough to teach 80% of my players (1 of the 5 read the rulebook) and then run an adventure that went against my preferred ethos of RPGs.

I will be honest: the adventure/rulebook purchase was the RPG purchase I am most disappointed in in my entire collection. I'm not angry or bitter, but I think was a disconnect between what I thought I'd get and what I got.

And from my lurking on these boards I don't think I am the only one. Is the system all that bad? No. Will it be a success, I can't tell. But I think there were mismatches between the teaser blogs and what was actually released.

Seriously guys, chill it. We're not here to flame war. I will get this thread locked if all we're capable off past a certain point is arguing about how useful a Rogue is.

That aside, I noticed that a lot of posts here that seem to basically only care about continuing 3.5 so I guess the question I have for you is, why did you not just continue to play 3.5? You had the material to last decades, probably longer. So why did you really put your faith and your wallets in a mid sized publishing company who was taking the single biggest risk they possibly could have taken?

I wouldn't have said the continuation of d20 was my core reason, but I can tell you why we started pathfinder.

Campaign was fun. One of us had a hard copy phb. We all had pdfs. My wife and two other players said they hated character creation from the pdfs. So for the next campaign we went with pathfinder as it was in print.

Thanks for the writeup. It's an impressive number of surveys recieved.

With a bit of a stats background - Paizo sent out a general direction survey a long time ago (about 1-2 years) asking about how one played Pathfinder, the products one purchased, and the direction they wanted to see the game go. As I filled it out I told my wife it looked like another edition was coming. I'd hope that they are using that data to try and to 'weight' the playtest surveys to get that excellent confidence interval.

I am really pleased to see that Jason thinks they should have released a converted adventure. I was dead keen to try the playtest and grabbed 2 copies of the core rules and also the adventure. And then realised it wasn't an adventure and was just a collection of set pieces. That combined with the difficulty of understanding the core rules meant I didn't participate. I would have been all over a 3-6 session module/adventure.

Whilst I think one of the best attractions of Pathfinder is the ability to slap class levels, feats, and Hit Dice progression on monsters I can see why I'm a minority.

Yes I did want it to ship with the next subscription. How do I ensure that the use for store credit for subscription options is turned on?

Hi there,

This week I got an email saying $15 had been applied to my account in store credit, I was going to spend it with Order 7444241, but I couldn't see any option to do so? I'm not sure if it happens automatically before my card is charged or if I made a mistake in the process?

Hello John,

I have cancelled Adventure Path 132 and generated Adventure Path 133. However, when we tried to authorize the order we got a payment failure decline. Let me know when you are ready and I can give it another try.

Hi Diego,

I suspect that is because the default card loaded on my account is invalid. I've yet to be able to change the default card despite a couple of attempts. There are secondary cards save on there, are you able to charge the one ending 4223?

Hi there,

I signed up for an adventure path subscription - Order 5163543 - however I'm sure I selected it to start with Volume 1 of the Return of the Runelords path. But my confirmation email suggests it will start with book 6 of the prior AP. Could you get that changed?

At this point, I feel like I'm doing the playtest more for the sake of giving the feedback than because I think it will actually be any fun.

That sounds incredibly depressing.

If Doomsday Dawn isn't connecting, I'd recommend trying one of the Pathfinder Society Scenarios.

http://paizo.com/products/btpya1y3?Pathfinder-Society-Playtest-Scenario-1-T he-Rose-Street-Revenge

http://paizo.com/products/btpya1y4?Pathfinder-Society-Playtest-Scenario-2-R aiders-of-Shrieking-Peak

http://paizo.com/products/btpya1y5?Pathfinder-Society-Playtest-Scenario-3-A rclords-Envy

Thanks! I will definitely check those out.

I looked at trying to do a small campaign arc in PF2, but my players current classes don't translate well from PF1 to PF2.

So I downloaded the playtest because a player in my gaming circle wanted to try the new system and I understand the OP issues.

After reading the rules and reading the adventures I am unsure what PF2 is offering me. A new system has to offer something superior to the old so that you think it is worth scraping all the money you invested in the old system for the new, while at the same time giving players experiences they can't get elsewhere.

D&D 4e I could see what they were trying to do with the system but it didn't give me an experience I couldn't get elsewhere, in fact it felt so much like a video game that I was always thinking I could get the same experience but better playing on my computer.

D&D 5e is an example of a system that gave me something different from the pervious so I could see exactly what it was trying to do and it gave an experience that you couldn't get elsewhere so there was clear reason to play it. Now I personally don't like the system but i am able to see the appeal other have for it so I get what it was offering people to buy it.

3.x/PF1 Both are examples of offering something I couldn't get elsewhere and I could see what it was trying to do. SO I could see the value. PF1 had the advantage of saying we are going to keep 3.x alive which was great because 4e really was crap for most people.

So what is PF2 trying to showcase? Why is this better than PF1, what is it about this system that solves ENGOUGH issues to make the hundreds of dollars invensted in PF1 worth giving up? I don't see it.

The playtest adventures where so poor at showing me why PF2 is worth a look. That I scrapped it completely and started working on a one night adventure. When I playtested 5e I got it immediately what they were trying to achieve. I see PF2 as a reactionary response to D&D 5e actually being popular and PF losing some market share so they feel they have to release a new edition. I don't mean to say this is just a money grab as that isn't the case. It instead feels like a desperate...

Glad I'm not the only one :)

Please move this thread to the GM section on the Doomsday Dawn threads... you posted numerous spoilers to the Playtest adventure and while you may not have found the plot interesting this does not means other won't, or that some people might not want to know what to expect from the parts of the playtest before playing them.

I don't think I can now that I've posted, I didn't even consider the spoiler side when thinking about where to post.

If you like the look of 90% of PF2e then don't force yourself to playtest if you're not going to enjoy it and that 10% isn't a dealbreaker. Otherwise if you see substantially big issues the only chance you have of getting them fixed is to participate in the playtest. Otherwise you'll get a 2nd edition that you and your group hates.

On this I'm torn. I have too many gaming systems already and not enough time :) So I'm probably a good target :) Unfortunately for Paizo I'm content enough with what I have in terms of rulebooks, that if I don't like the finished PF2 product I will simply play other games. Whilst I'd like it to be a superb set of rules (because their adventures and supporting material is usually really good) I content to watch and make a decision in a year's time.

In a theoretical way I'd like to run the playtest, as I like Paizo, but finding the motivation after reading everything is hard.

I wasn't sure if this feedback was due here, or elsewhere. I'm struggling to find the motivation to run the playtest. When it was announced I was dead keen, I've teased the countdown clock to my players (both in Entombed with the Pharaohs, and I ran the theme across my Legacy of Fire Campaign, which ended suddenly with a TPK). So I was really excited to get some answers. However I'm struggling to find motivation for three reasons

1) The explanation for the countdown timer is disappointing. "Some wizard made a portal to bring the dominion of the black here, go stop it". I was hoping for something more awesome.

2) The scenarios (I'll come to some exceptions) are boring. We have
- A 12 room dungeon crawl
- A linear outdoor trip with a 7 room dungeon
- A multi wave attack on a house
- An assault on a fortress
- A meatgrinder
- An infiltration
- A boss battle

They are not all bad. The mirrored moon has a neat subsystem that will reward savvy play. Whilst I can see some players might like the 'sword of doom' the meatgrinder brings, my players will not. A lot of the scenarios feel like they are scripted encounter, followed by scripted encounter, and there isn't anything the players can do other than 'have the next combat'.

3) My big problem here is I'm really struggling to see how the new system is meant to shine in these scenarios. I love Pathfinder for its modularity and customization. I deeply appreciate I can scale up encounters by slapping some class levels on monsters. I have loved Paizo's adventures because they frequently put players in new situations, with combats where the players have to adjust. For example in the end of eternity there is a Brass Ram monster built to just bolt out of combat (but which the players want to kill), and also a ship combat (where the rules for casting, or moving on a ship kick in).

Very few of the combats in the adventure have anything so cool. I will call out the final battle, where you are trying to disarm a complex trap and complete the battle, that is pretty neat. But zeroing in on Affair at Sombrefell hall, the player's only defensive option is to barricade the door, which gives them three rounds warning to take up defensive positions (which strangely enough could also be achieved by taking up defensive positions initially). There is a chandelier that can be dropped (but no rules for the enemies trying to drop it). The other waves of monsters just 'get in'.

I'm not sure what the new system is trying to do / show off. None of them see to try and showcase why resonance or other new features are awesome. Red Flags comes the closest, as infiltration has sometimes gone horribly wrong in PF1.

I'll try to tack this another way, a number of Lamentations of the Flame Princess adventures don't translate into 3.X or 5e adventures. Rather they show off the weird side of their world. They rely on DM adjudication. And they stress how life is cheap and you shouldn't be attached to your character. They show off what the publishers think are the strengths of the system.
Likewise 5e hardback adventures can show off the strengths of 5e, where combat/monsters are frequently something to be avoided at low levels. Where basic combat is abstracted enough to move quickly and rarely require a grid.
I read the playtest adventure and rules and I'm not sure what it's trying to do. What stories will it help me tell better as a DM over other systems out there?

I"ll try to join in the playtest as actual testing data is important. But it is hard for me to sum up the enthusiasm for the following three reasons. I'm not excited about the plot presented, I feel most the scenarios are boring, and I'm not sure what PF2 is trying to achieve.

Quidest & The Rot Grub,

I agree that the conditions are (perhaps) more streamlined than 1e. 1e conditions are a lot of effects you just have to memorize.

But the design team has been clearly working on a philosophy of cohesion. Everything is a feat. 3 actions. Spells that only scale if you overcast.

Mark Seifter had a great post when reference to the action economy change talking about quarks and bamzoms pointing out the huge variety in the types of actions currently available in pf1 and how their interactions rely on the player memorizing the process.

Then we now have a similar situation with conditions and there is no cohesive structure. It may be fun. It may be better and simpler than 1e. But I think it doesn't match their design philosophy and is bad design.

To go to 5e - the game system revolves around advantage/disadvantage and adding dice. The designers talk about they wanted to get rid of +1s and +2s and +4s. In most places they succeeded- except for projectile weapons into cover. Partial cover grants +2 to ac, full cover gives +5 to ac. To me that's bad design as it doesn't fit their philosophy. It's also a question I hear repeatedly from tables playing 5e such as "what happens if I fire at the goblin in the bushes?"

This is the first blog post that I think is poor design.

We have a multitude of conditions. Some stack (frightened) some don't (haste). Some are flat modifiers, some are variable modifiers (depending on the number after the condition). All have different ways to remove them.

Yes they will be interesting individually but the lack of coherence is messy.

For all this talk about how the 1e action economy is clunky and how difficult the stacking of bonuses is ... now we have this. Yes the conditions are cool but they are all different and they all need to be learnt

I want to add 2c.

1) I think high level play grinds as the nature of d&d especially 3.0 / 3.5 / pf is that players get new toys as they level up. Thus at higher levels they have more options and everything grinds down.
Higher level spells are bigger offenders but higher level feats are too.

2) 4th ed did this very well with its three tiers of play and players swapping out powers so they never had too many options.

In terms of design I like the option to play zero or hero or demigod. I dont think the assumption that most campaigns should follow that progression is a good idea. I think campaigns should end when the story fits. But I definitely think the full options of rules should be in the game.

But the Villain Codex isn't a bestiary, is it?

It really is. There no player info. Its monsters sorted by society grouping than alphabetically.

With regards to monster books. Please either put bestiary in the title of all of them or only one. "Bestiary- monster codex" is fine but it frustrates me to have "villain codex" beside my "bestiary 5"

Thanks for your reply James. I didn't realise the emerald dungeon was hardcover.

Another question, you mentioned a while back that your preference was to keep drow purple skinned and you've provided some excellent commentary as to why.
I'm curious then as to why Duegar seem to be a dark grey colour? Was this as intentional as the drow colour choices?

I mistakenly thought the mechanic mentioned in the title was about being able to disengage from an obviously impossible fight

I guess I need to create a new thread ;-)

I thought so too. The rules for disengaging to beat a retreat are non existent at the moment and mechanically running out of tactical combat faces grim odds.

James Jacobs wrote:

John Whyte wrote:

James,

I've noticed that 5th editions adventures are usually single hardcover books. In my experience they can feel quite different to pathfinder adventure paths. The paths have more of a series/season feel. There is a conclusion at the end of each book and a couple of storylines across the whole path. The 5e books feel more like a movie with a singular theme and one resolution point.

Have the design team rejected concepts that you dont think would mesh with your 6 part adventure path format? If so can you tell us more about the ideas.

There are a LOT of stories that work better as stand-alone adventures (be they 64 page adventures or 256 pages or whatever). The "Kill the Dragon" plot is the classic one, and is a good example of a plot we rejected for an AP and instead used for a stand-alone adventure ("The Dragon's Demand").

Thanks for that. Can I ask if Paizo has examined doing stand alone adventures longer than 64 pages? And if so what were the arguments against doing so?

Did you miss my above question with it being written so close to one your answers or does it hold 'closely guarded unmentionable secrets' TM.

John Whyte wrote:

James,

I've noticed that 5th editions adventures are usually single hardcover books. In my experience they can feel quite different to pathfinder adventure paths. The paths have more of a series/season feel. There is a conclusion at the end of each book and a couple of storylines across the whole path. The 5e books feel more like a movie with a singular theme and one resolution point.

Have the design team rejected concepts that you dont think would mesh with your 6 part adventure path format? If so can you tell us more about the ideas.

There are a LOT of stories that work better as stand-alone adventures (be they 64 page adventures or 256 pages or whatever). The "Kill the Dragon" plot is the classic one, and is a good example of a plot we rejected for an AP and instead used for a stand-alone adventure ("The Dragon's Demand").

Thanks for that. Can I ask if Paizo has examined doing stand alone adventures longer than 64 pages? And if so what were the arguments against doing so?

James,

I've noticed that 5th editions adventures are usually single hardcover books. In my experience they can feel quite different to pathfinder adventure paths. The paths have more of a series/season feel. There is a conclusion at the end of each book and a couple of storylines across the whole path. The 5e books feel more like a movie with a singular theme and one resolution point.

Have the design team rejected concepts that you dont think would mesh with your 6 part adventure path format? If so can you tell us more about the ideas.

I really like the thought that has gone in to making the stat blocks easier to use. The grouping of the information, and the refinement of the information are very good.

I like the reduction/removal of 3/day as those sort of limits don't usually matter given how most combats play out.

Mark you talk about how monster's only superficially follow the same rules as PCs. And you are correct. For a real custom monster I use the rules out of Unchained as they are so much easier. But that superficiality is exceptionally useful when wanting to change the monsters. Adding class levels is really good way of quickly modifying an encounter, 1-2 levels of fighter, or 1 level of rogue, not just to the NPCs, but to creatures that wouldn't usually get class levels (tigers, dragons, demons).

The other place where is exceptionally helpful is templates. One of the more memorable dungeons this campaign included my zombie orcs. Zombie orc minions, zombie orc chieftain, and a zombie ettin. I could have created these from scratch, but I just applied the zombie template.

So whilst I agree that monsters in their creation don't follow the same rules having them look like they do add some excellent GM tools to my toobox.

Hi there,

Can I cancel order 5089286 mostly as I thought I was buying my own birthday gift this year, but my wife thought differently. Yes it is a bad reason, I know and I'm sorry.

John

I have some minis. Some I've painted
Some prepainted. Some pawns. But now I print out monsters from inline pictures and bluetack them to plastic 1" bases that I get from China for dirt cheap. They store well, last well, and I can usually get what I need

There are some good answers here.

As a gm what I want the most is for the module to inspire me. I need to see a grand exciting outline so I can fill in and dream up excellent responses to the characters in play. When they loot the ogres pockets, or go slightly off script I want to have enough imagination juice to roll with it.

Being able to find information like what an npc looks like on the fly is really important.

I also like good comments on how dungeon rooms interlink. Party makes a huge explosion in room 8a, I want to be able to quickly respond to it.

Lastly I want it to be obvious players have meaningful choices. Nothing worse than a railroad.

Many thanks. I'll try dividing my boxes else it'll be 10 in a bag for me.

I think the key with backstory is brief hooks. It needs to be short and have a hook. "My mother died in a mysterious blue fire" is okay, it gives a specific hook for a gm.
"I was dared by a friend to steal Professor Goggyworts undies" is better. Now other players can hook in, either as the daring friend, classmates, or the professor. This backstory is open we don't know if the dare was attempted let along successful.

It is an art but I think a good backstory should have hooks for players and the dm to work in with. The best work in the characters motivation as well.

Greetings

I have a number of Paizo pawns from four different sets.

I'm after some way to organise them. Frequently I am after a generic ish pawn Town guard / undead / Demon and I'm looking for a best fit. Rifling through a jumbled two boxes isn't working.

The large monsters I have put into card sleeve folders. However I find that the medium and small monsters fall out of these far too easily. I still have no idea what to do about the gargantuan creatures.

I'm keen to hear easier suggestions for storing and retrieving them.

I'd suggest sitting down with your paladin and sorc out of character and saying "look your character is significantly more effective than the other players. Your reading ahead caused issues in xyz. This is lessening enjoyment for the other players, how do you think this should be resolved?"

He may have an answer. In my experience he won't and you are best to remove him. But my 2c is this is the best way to have the conversation, he could make some suggestions

Mr Nelson,

I hope you are still reading this thread. I think I emailed you but I may have your wrong email, I'm about to begin prepping this part of the adventure path and would love the directors cut? Would you send it me?

Ive run 1 pbf game here and 2 on another site, all successful. It's very different.

The time investment in pbf is greater, 10-15 minutes every day gets relentless. Unlike IRL where I'll play anything I need to really want to run this pbf story. I now look for player concepts that look as if they will maintain interest over the long grind.

You get a game where details are remembered due to search functions. IRL I have to be heavy handed in plot points especially if a session or two has passed and still players will latch onto something else. Pbf players are much more on their toes.

Good pbf players give great roleplaying.

As a dm pacing is harder. In a scene I can whip round the table see if anyone wants to do anything else. A discussion like this in pbf is 1-3 days. As is plan formulating.

I think adventures with a clear end and clear objectives are the best for pbf.

I don't want to nerf it, but I'd like some options or suggestions to pitch to other players because otherwise it seems unfair. However I have no clue how to value or approximate the worth of a pseudodragon.

So last night my campaign ended early as the players clobbered to bbeg when he was meant to escape. The party was 5th level.

That's all good. The Ranger had for fairly good roleplaying reasons a pseudodragon as her animal companion.

2 players wanted to get new characters so the campaign concluded there.

The next campaign is set 15 years in the future dealing with some side quest issues and players have chosen new characters, except for the Ranger who wants to keep her character. She's happy to drop back to our starting level of level 2. She's got a good concept of what has happened in the 15 years and she really really wants to keep the pseudodragon.

Whilst fine my bigger concern is the other players. Classes of bard, rogue, and investigator. The Ranger is going to get her animal companion earlier and it's a better companion than usual.
What benefits would you suggest offering the other pcs for equal coolness/power level? Extra gold? Of what value? Additional extracts per day? Something else?

I have run it - I used the simple rule - no classes that can cast spell at first level. I allowed an investigator who played up the alchemy / healing herb thing.
I also gave them each one magic item, that basically leveled up with them and provided at certain levels the bonuses of the big six items. (Cloak of resistance etc). If I did this again I'd use the varient in unchained that gives the player these bonuses. I leant my copy of the book out so I don't have the actual name.
I also used the wounds and vigor varient. It meant characters were more survivable as no magic healing was easily around. I still used hp for monsters as I'm lazy.
I used lots of monsters with class levels. Greens kind and gnolls were common bad guys. They had the same class restrictions as players.

My results -
Players would rest for days after a long haul / bad fight. I'd explain this and impliment the downtime rules if I ran this again.

Fighters were underpowered due to lack of skill points - I'd use the background skill rules varient if playing again.

Players were very very attached to their magic items. They got names and back stories. Much more role playing there.

Players avoided combat and used stealth, deception, and diplomacy more. (Also bows were used more. The gunslinger was a little sidelined at this point)

Random encounters were important and players worked hard to avoid them.
It wasn't more deadly than expected.

You can do some great plots. There is no sending to call for the cavalry or let the king know of danger.

My players had darkness cast on them in a cavern. It was terrifying.
Skil points were far more important. Survival wad essential. Disguise self frequently used. Climb and swim were skills that some players kept putting points into.

Conclusion - good experience. Different. Would do again.

Just 2c for the original poster -

I don't think it's necessary to know all the rules. Just some key ones.

As a dm if a rule comes up I'm unsure about if my first Google search doesn't answer it, I'm making a call. If it's really important to a player it's usually a combat round and they have til their next turn to produce an argument.

Anything very grey I make a call, and at the beginning of next session make a ruling.

I've had characters die for wrong rules. But most of the time the experience was fun and memorable so when it was found out later it was just oh well...

And to be fair I've lost boss monsters the same way.

Your barbarian died strangled by a snake, it's pretty cool. If a player is upset later on I'd be wondering why such an adverserial attitude. I'd be firm and say yes the rules were wrong, now moving on there is a grizzly murder.

@ GM Giuseppe

Thanks for that reply.

I'll try to put together an application.

Specifically @PirateDevon, I do have a hectic week coming up and I'm a little sad I may not get to complete the application so feel free to put in yours.

I am interested and have some questions:
The first one is mostly for completeness's sake : Are the replacement classes in Unchained allowed or are you sticking to the classes as originally published?

My initial thoughts are a character who was part of the crew on the ship and really would like to get back home to his family. It would enable the stubbornness of the dwarf to come through. With that I'd suggest he have a relationship with the free Captains and has worked on their ships? Or is being part of the crew relationship enough?

As a concept how does that sound?

Also if you are wanting the party's background/fit to balance more than the actual class combos do you want me to make an application with suggested classes (the above could work as a background for a rouge, ranger, barbarian, or fighter class and honestly the class has always been secondary to backstory for me anyway) or would you prefer I pick a class and stick with it?

There is an alternative racial trait for a dwarf entitled 'salt beard' which is in the advanced race guide, but I know the guide copies a number of traits from smaller publications. Do you know if it is the dwarfs of Golorian book?

I'm sad I'm pretty sure I didn't make it through the first cull. Was quite sure after voting before the first cull it would given I was pretty certain it was formatted well and wasn't a joke item, or an IP ripoff.

Such is life.

Spell in a weapon Vs horribly horribly under priced benefits for any social orientated character.

Making matters worse this is the third time I've seen the weapon, and the third time I'm voting for it. The alternatives are always worse.

I need a shower

A drinking item with a random bonus, vs something I'm pretty sure is stolen straight out of a joke from a webcomic.
Also one of these is 83 words and the other is 298
I've seen both before and selected the opponents each other time.
I don't know....