Please include the following in your playtest reports

[Sean K Reynolds]

Please include the following information when you post feedback about a Round 4 Encounter. You don't have to stick to this format (though that helps), but providing at least this much information helps standardize the feedback and makes it easier for the voters to review everyone's playtest feedback.

Post your playtest feedback as a reply to the encounter you playtested (do not post it as a reply to this thread).

NUMBER OF PCs
The default assumption for the CR system is a party of 4 PCs of the same level. If you had more or fewer PCs, say so.
For playtesting these encounters, please use PCs whose character level matches the CR of the tiered encounter. For example, if playtesting a CR 4 encounter, use 4th-level PCs.

RACE/CLASS/LEVEL OF PCs
Note the race, character class, and level of the PCs, such as "dwarf ranger, elf druid, halfling sorcerer, human rogue." Some race/class/party combinations may have a harder or easier time with an encounter.
By default, characters should be built with the "standary fantasy" 15 point ability score point-buy or one of the ability score arrays used by Pathfinder Society Organized Play.
PCs should have appropriate wealth according to Table 12-4: Character Wealth by Level (Core Rulebook 399), and using the "balanced approach" that they can spend about 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable/consumable items like potions, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.

TIER
This should be obvious by listing the level of the PCs, but please call out whether you playtested the low tier, high tier, or both.

EASE OF RUNNING THE ENCOUNTER
Was it easy to run? Was there anything confusing about the map or encounter? Was there any missing information? If you ran both tiers, did one work better than the other?

CHALLENGE OF THE ENCOUNTER
Did the encounter feel appropriately challenging to the PCs? A CR-appropriate encounter should expend some party resources but shouldn't be too hard to overcome. If you ran both tiers, was one more challenging than the other?

FUN OF THE ENCOUNTER
Was the encounter fun to play? Was it memorable? Any fun, funny, or cool anecdotes you'd like to share from your playtest? If you ran both tiers, was one more fun than the other?

OTHER COMMENTS
Feel free to add other feedback about the encounter. Did any PC tend to dominate the encounter?
And thank you for participating in the playtesting for Round 4! Your playtest reports help inform other voters.

[Sean K Reynolds]

Reply here if there's other stuff you think would be valuable in a playtest report. I'll update the above post to include relevant changes.

All entries for this round will include a link to the above post so everyone reading them sees what playtest info we're asking for.

[Cheapy]

Perhaps which PC, if any, seemed to dominate the encounter. Although I'm afraid that might just turn into bickering discussions of the power level of classes.

What the general tactics were as well.

[Anthony Adam]

Hi Sean and fellow Judges...

I was going to do an technical execution summary for each map, am I ok to do that still?

I posted elsewhere the items I would be looking for under "Map fu says hello" in general discussion.

If you would rather I didnt, no biggie, just let me know. Thanks all.

To Cheapy:

Bear in mind, some encounters may be designed to test range over melee, or may be trap city type for the rogue to shine, so where classes will shine may be an inherent part of the entry. I will certainly be looking for this too, but wont count it as unbalancing, as we are dealing with a single encounter and not a whole adventure.

[Mark Moreland]

Anthony Adam wrote:

I was going to do an technical execution summary for each map, am I ok to do that still?

I posted elsewhere the items I would be looking for under "Map fu says hello" in general discussion.

If you would rather I didnt, no biggie, just let me know. Thanks all.

I can't say I know exactly what you mean by "technical execution summary." If you mean you want to look at what the contestants did well and what could be improved in their map turnovers, by all means. That's part of the contest, after all.

[Cheapy]

Of course. And that's part of the reason why I'd like to see a discussion of the tactics and methods used to overcome the encounter. The encounters I enjoy the most are the ones where there are multiple ways to overcome them.

Also, it could present a nice opportunity to see how groups actually play.

[Bombadil]

Hey Sean, thanks for the guidelines.

Should we add something about what point buy or array was used in character creation? I know Neil already suggested the 15 point buy, maybe that's something understood by most people?

What about set character wealth for the builds? Maybe that's also understood by others more well versed than I?

I suppose the amount/type of consumables used can be reflected in the 'other comments' or 'challenge of the encounter' sections.

Just trying to think of things that can change the numbers and how the encounters unfold.

Many thanks for your time!

[RonarsCorruption]

It's certainly true that any given encounter might favor one type of character over another, but these are superstar encounters, and the best encounters give everyone a shot for glory.

[Anthony Adam]

Mark Moreland wrote:

Anthony Adam wrote:

I was going to do an technical execution summary for each map, am I ok to do that still?

I posted elsewhere the items I would be looking for under "Map fu says hello" in general discussion.

If you would rather I didnt, no biggie, just let me know. Thanks all.

I can't say I know exactly what you mean by "technical execution summary." If you mean you want to look at what the contestants did well and what could be improved in their map turnovers, by all means. That's part of the contest, after all.

It is exactly that - things like missing/wrong scales, mislabelling, description not matching map, that sort of thing. It will give me something I can do while I wait for my players :)

[Sean K Reynolds]

I've updated the original post. Thank you for your feedback! :)

[DonalGraeme]

Just making sure, but we should post our playtest results in the individual encounter threads, correct?

[Neil Spicer]

Yes.

[Roshan]

Neil Spicer wrote:

Yes.

it would be cool if there was a chronicle sheet for these encounters. That would be sweet.