RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
We played through a few encounters from Dragon's Demand, mostly stuff from the dungeon I think. I ran two characters (Arcanist and Swashbuckler, another player ran two characters (Slayer and Shaman) and a third ran the Skald.
1st fight was against a Gibbering Mouther
2nd was an attic whisperer
3rd was a group of 4 Azers
4th was a Wraith and 4 Wights
We rested once here.
5th was a Mummy with monk class levels
The Arcanist played pretty well, though I didn't really get a chance to play around with the neat spellcasting mechanic since we only rested once and I didn't have a lot of changes I wanted to make with my spell list. I did like having the opportunity though, and can see how the versatility will make it fun to play in a full game.
Blood Focus helped me out in a couple tight spots (the last two fights especially) by giving me some extra oomf on my evocation spells, but I never bothered to spend it on my bloodline power (verdant) as it didn't seem worth the point cost to use tripvine. None of the other bloodline powers I skimmed through when building the character felt like they'd be any better. Maybe at higher levels, the more powerful bloodline abilities might be worth the point, say flight perhaps, or energy resistance.
The Swashbuckler was very fun. I built for Dex to Damage via Dervish Dance, which gave it quite a boost (which was quite nice, since several of the enemies we fought were undead, and at the time were not subject to precise strike. I see that's been changed now). I liked the Parry ability, it was fun and easy to use. I never got to use riposte because I didn't have the feat to spend on Combat Reflexes and it requires multiple AoOs--perhaps a class ability that grants additional AoOs would be a good idea, otherwise this feels like a feat tax.
One thing that almost came up, and I wasn't sure about. Parrying attacks from incorporeal foes--does that work? I had a magic weapon so it made some sense, but I can see an argument that a ghost should be able to pass right through a mundane sword no problem. I've got no problem with it either way, just something I wondered about.
The Skald was not terribly impressed. He played a mix between spellcasting and melee, and fared pretty well in both, but his Raging Song didn't help the rest of the party too much (two casters and a Dex fighter), so consequently he never felt like it was worth the standard action to activate it. He also had a tough time choosing rage powers, as a lot of low level ones require an action to activate, and thus don't work with raging song.
He recommends trying to make raging song helpful to more types of characters, and perhaps giving the skald a way to just rage himself as a free or swift action, like a barbarian does.
The Slayer was a little let down that he only had 1d6 of sneak attack at 5th level. He also didn't use his Favored Target ability very much, since it was usually better for him to just run up and attack rather than spend the move action (that may have been a consequence of his build though). My sense of the targeting mechanic is that it's meant to be used prior to combant, as the Slayer sneaks up on his prey, which is a cool concept, but is tough to pull off in a group-focused game where not everyone may be as sneaky as the Slayer. He otherwise acquired himself pretty well in melee, and only the last fight caused him any real concern due to the mummy's despair aura.
The Shaman said the character felt pretty much like a cleric, what with having cleric spellcasting and channel energy. He did really like the Battle spirit's initial power, that let him maximize healing spells he cast on other people. He actually used it offensively more than he did on his allies, since we fought a lot of undead. It seems pretty powerful, even when limited in uses per day.
Overall, I thought the classes were quite fun and flavorful, though I think a few of them need some work, and I'm excited about the upcomming revisions to the Arcanist!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I GMed this session, and I gotta say that swashbuckler was pretty darn deadly. The arcanist was also very effective, and those boosted magic missiles really helped against the wraith.
I forgot that the shaman was a shaman 90% of the time; it just felt like fighting a cleric. I read the blog entry about changing the spell list to the druid spell list, which I think would be a big help to making it feel different from the cleric.
The slayer didn't register with me much in a fight, which is not a good sign.
I felt bad for the skald, who basically was either helping another member flank, or was just getting beat up by monsters.
As a side note, the mummy monk really rocked the PCs, and no one was super-effective at taking it out, though the swashbuckler's parry did prevent several stunning fists and extra damage. But that's more about a CR 8 mummy monk being really badass than the PCs being sucky.
So the dex-to-damage swashbuckler did more damage than the guy whose whole schtick is lots of damage?
Interesting.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I think in that case it may have been an issue of accuracy. The swashbuckler was making one attack with a high bonus, while the slayer was making several attacks with a lower bonus. When the slayer was hitting, he was doing pretty well on damage.
I could be mis-remembering though, I'll see if the player of the slayer can come on and clarify.