Was lucky enough this year to attend PaizoCon and Origins, so will try and respond about both.
Jason S wrote:
How many players did you have at your table? Did you ever have a solo or 2 player table? How often did you have a 6 player table?
PaizoCon: Was almost always a table of 4, sometimes three and sometimes 5. A table of 6 was alsmost always broken up into two tables of 3.
Origins: Mainly played with the same group, so it was mainly a table of three but this was mostly due to the fact that we were either playing a scenario others weren't looking for or we had already started when others showed up.
Jason S wrote:
What level was the player skill? Better than expected? Less than you expected?
PaizoCon: Those who were there specifically for PACG were very well skilled. Those who wandered over to the back of the room to see what was going on that wasn't quite role-playing had a different skillset. But every table seemed welcoming and I saw the experienced players being very welcoming to teach new players.
Origins: Organized Play seemed to be experienced players, and into two groups...those looking for Adventure 1 and those looking to play-test Adventure 2. The main focus of the booth seemed to be to provide demos, and was great to see how many people were coming up to get demos of the game and then asked about organized play.
Jason S wrote:
Did anyone roleplay? :)
Roleplay seems to take on a bit of a different meaning from a full RPG. We would often describe our character doing something or how the effect was impacting the characters, but it was more descriptive than traditional roleplay. There are also many fun moments when card synergies fall together and you can describe how that would have all worked as narrative...and the flip side when cards come up which make no sense in context and you can all laugh as you describe how bewildered the characters would be.
Jason S wrote:
Did anyone at the table misunderstand a rule and then have it corrected by playing OP? (I think this is one of the greatest benefits of OP).
PaizoCon: I'd say this happened a few times but not as a major rules meltdown but more of a "hrmmm" should this be X or Y? And if a Paizo person was close we would get an answer, if not we made a best judgement...then when we could we asked someone from Paizo and either congratulated ourselves on being "right" or said, "well, now we know for the next game."
Origins: As most of the time was playing Adventure 2, there were quite a few questions that came up about what the Scenario was wanting to have happen...but not so much about the game rules.
Jason S wrote:
Were players teamwork orientated and did players discuss choices (at critical points) or did everyone "do their own thing"? Did players ask for blessings at critical points (or where they were in trouble) or did they just roll and fail without asking for help?
Jason S wrote:
Did players try to work as a group or did some players "go rogue" and start exploring locations that benefitted them in terms of boons (but perhaps they couldn’t close the location)?
PaizoCon: Lots of teamwork. A few players who couldn't or wouldn't play as a team member but I didn't play multiple games with them. For the most part though, it is one of the best parts of the game of being able to develop a team strategy.
Origins: Lots of teamwork. But this also ended up being pretty much the only group I played with at Origins as we sort of started down our path and just kept going. There looked to be some other fun Organized Play people that would have been fun to group with, so was a little sad that I didn't get to mingle more. But the teamwork that developed with the group I played with was great.
Jason S wrote:
Did you ever have time to harvest locations for loot (by not closing a location on purpose)?
PaizoCon: Not very often.
Origins: Yes.
Jason S wrote:
Were there any characters archetypes that were played more than others? Were Seoni and Kyra really common? :) Were any class decks more common than others? Were any class decks rarely seen?
PaizoCon: It felt that when you saw someone playing from a class deck it was almost always the same one or two characters from the class deck. I'd say that it seemed Rogues and Wizards were the one's I saw least.
Origins: There were few enough organized play players that people just seemed to play what they wanted.
Jason S wrote:
Were healers frequent or were people flexible enough someone would play one if no one else was playing support? Were there ever too many support characters at a table? Did you ever play in a group with no support characters (and were you successful)?
It always seemed that there were support characters, and even if it was all support or no support the groups I played with viewed that as part of the challenge of the scenario for that team.
Hope that was somewhat useful commentary. :)