|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I received an E-mail shortly before the playtest began, and it sounded like they were inviting me to participate and to "Watch This Space For Details"...but no further details ever came, and the whole thing appears to have passed me by thus far. What was the deal there (I'm also a little worried, because someone I know who's an arrogant moron with a proclivity for bean-counting/power-gaming evidently got in on the playtest, and what worries me is that she said they appear to be listening to her critiques)?
What IS playtesting? How does it work? What are my incentives for participating? What do I need to do? What power can I potentially wield? Does it mean I have to play a game using unfinished material, or can I analyze and comment without playing?
EDIT: Okay, so I've managed to download the present version of the playtest PDF, so that looks all well and good. What now?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are two schools of thought. Either way, this is the first step:
1) Download the Playtest document here
2) Choose one of the following options (here's where opinions diverge)
a) Make characters using one or more of the classes, run them in some modules, scenarios, adventure paths, single combat encounters, etc. Provide feedback of your experience, along with any suggestions.
Fill out the survey here.
Play some more. Follow the Class Discussion forums here for any changes and update your characters accordingly.
Rinse and repeat.
b) Skim the playtest document and then post on the forums about how overpowered, useless, and/or redundant the class is and accuse Paizo of money-grabbing.
The entire world is invited. It's not like an MMORPG closed beta type thing. Anyone who clicks on the appropriate links publicly available on the website can download the playtest rules.
Download the rules. Build some characters. Play them. Tell Paizo what you think about them as far as feel, play, concept, etc.
When the book comes out, it will have the final version with all of the typos, errors, kinks, and various issues ironed out (for the most part).
What IS playtesting? How does it work? What are my incentives for participating? What do I need to do? What power can I potentially wield? Does it mean I have to play a game using unfinished material, or can I analyze and comment without playing?
Yes, you basically have to play a game using unfinished material. The thing that matters to Paizo (and to the average player) is whether the new classes work in actual gameplay, not how much theoretical damage they can or cannot do.
The incentive is - you get to have your voice heard now, while there's time for the developers to make changes based upon player feedback.
EDIT: Okay, so I've managed to download the present version of the playtest PDF, so that looks all well and good. What now?
Now go find some other players, get someone to GM, and go play :) Let Paizo know how your new character worked out.
Do they feel like they reflect the background information we're given, do they fit the desired role in the party, do they feel lacking in any way? Most of all though - was it fun to play - if so, why, and if not, why not?
|
|
There are two schools of thought. Either way, this is the first step:
1) Download the Playtest document here
2) Choose one of the following options (here's where opinions diverge)
a) Make characters using one or more of the classes, run them in some modules, scenarios, adventure paths, single combat encounters, etc. Provide feedback of your experience, along with any suggestions.
Fill out the survey here.
Play some more. Follow the Class Discussion forums here for any changes and update your characters accordingly.
Rinse and repeat.
b) Skim the playtest document and then post on the forums about how overpowered, useless, and/or redundant the class is and accuse Paizo of money-grabbing.
I feel if those are the only two schools of thought, something's very wrong. Whatever happened to c) don't be an imbecile bean-counter or useless troll and know how to appraise material fairly and constructively, and improve it fairly and creatively, using your brain, bearing in mind that you're trying to be a fantasy adventurer breaking new ground and not an accountant wearing further into a preordained collective groove?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel if those are the only two schools of thought, something's very wrong. Whatever happened to c) don't be an imbecile bean-counter or useless troll and know how to appraise material fairly and constructively, and improve it fairly and creatively, using your brain, bearing in mind that you're trying to be a fantasy adventurer breaking new ground and not an accountant wearing further into a preordained collective groove?
c) is a perfectly valid option, and one with value, but it is not playtesting, due to the lack of playing and testing.
I feel if those are the only two schools of thought, something's very wrong. Whatever happened to c) don't be an imbecile bean-counter or useless troll and know how to appraise material fairly and constructively, and improve it fairly and creatively, using your brain, bearing in mind that you're trying to be a fantasy adventurer breaking new ground and not an accountant wearing further into a preordained collective groove?
That's an option. It just isn't one Paizo have asked us to do (and to be fair, neither is b) )
They specifically want playtesting, not analysis of the written classes - which we can likely presume the game dev staff can do plenty of by themselves. They want an answer to "is this going to work when people actually play it", which at the end of the day is all that really matters.
That doesn't preclude coming up with suggestions for improvement - just that they need to be based upon actually playing that class and responding to how it played, not solely on how it looks on paper.
To put it more bluntly - they've got more than enough game designers on staff, what they don't have is a few thousand players which is the bit they need us for :)
|
|
c) is a perfectly valid option, and one with value, but it is not playtesting, due to the lack of playing and testing.
Fair enough - trouble is I'm much better at it than a, due in large part to the fact that my play options are very narrow where I live. I've got one Organized Play group that's managing to survive, but not without a certain "desperate, scrabbling will to live" feel to it, and only offers so much opportunity to dabble in "temporary" characters.
To put it more bluntly - they've got more than enough game designers on staff, what they don't have is a few thousand players which is the bit they need us for :)
Alright then, the stupid question: How do I become one of the game designers? Mechanically, these classes look pretty sound - conceptually, most of them are lacking in real creativity, without which you've got nothing, and that's what I'm good at.
regardless of which of these camps you fall into, you are free to share your thoughts in the class discussion forum. there is a thread for each class and the devs do read them.
|
Alright then, the stupid question: How do I become one of the game designers? Mechanically, these classes look pretty sound - conceptually, most of them are lacking in real creativity, without which you've got nothing, and that's what I'm good at.
"You guys are uncreative, without me you've got nothing." Hell of a pitch you got there, mang.
Alright then, the stupid question: How do I become one of the game designers? Mechanically, these classes look pretty sound - conceptually, most of them are lacking in real creativity, without which you've got nothing, and that's what I'm good at.
Heh. To do that, you go get a job at Paizo :) That likely involves getting yourself noticed first by working on a published product through a smaller publisher (or by entering this years RPG Superstar competition, which I believe opens TODAY!)
|
|
Heh. To do that, you go get a job at Paizo :) That likely involves getting yourself noticed first by working on a published product through a smaller publisher (or by entering this years RPG Superstar competition, which I believe opens TODAY!)
Really??? I thought that was a beginning-of-the-year thing. If that's the case, can you send me a link? I can't seem to find it.
As for smaller publishers/self-publishing, I'd thought about that, but the prospects of divided loyalties, an untidy paper trail, and "you have the rights to this, you don't have the rights to that, and those guys way over there have the rights to that somehow" makes me nervous. I actually tried submitting an article to KOBOLD QUARTERLY (one which Wolfgang Baur acknowledged interest in beforehand about weird new golems), but I wound up missing the deadline for that issue...which turned out to be their very last issue before they went out of print.
We're just waiting for an official announcement somewhere on the Paizo site to appear along with instructions of how to enter, so keep your eyes peeled! :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're just waiting for an official announcement somewhere on the Paizo site to appear along with instructions of how to enter, so keep your eyes peeled! :)
"Somewhere on the Paizo site?" So you don't know of any more specific place to look or way to search? I'm just making sure - I'm kind of Internet-clumsy, and this isn't the easiest website to navigate, either.
Well, theoretically this page should change to the 2014 contest when they launch.
Other than that, keep an eye on the front page.
I'll check back later today and will post a reply in here if there's anything up :)
They'll probably make the announcement via the Paizo Blog, and in the RPG Superstar General Discussion forum.
Now live here!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
c) is a perfectly valid option, and one with value, but it is not playtesting, due to the lack of playing and testing.
Fair enough - trouble is I'm much better at it than a, due in large part to the fact that my play options are very narrow where I live. I've got one Organized Play group that's managing to survive, but not without a certain "desperate, scrabbling will to live" feel to it, and only offers so much opportunity to dabble in "temporary" characters.
Alright then, the stupid question: How do I become one of the game designers? Mechanically, these classes look pretty sound - conceptually, most of them are lacking in real creativity, without which you've got nothing, and that's what I'm good at.To put it more bluntly - they've got more than enough game designers on staff, what they don't have is a few thousand players which is the bit they need us for :)
The boards are practically filthy with people that think they're awesome at design. Theorycrafters and armchair designers are a dime a dozen during playtest. Actually playing some encounters (or a module or a PFS adventure) and giving feedback in the Playtest forum will get you waaay more notice and acknowledgement than any thread that starts with "In my opinion..." or "It should be obvious that..."
Here's a good example. Opinion thread (no playtesting) started and locked almost immediately.
-Skeld
|
|
The boards are practically filthy with people that think they're awesome at design. Theorycrafters and armchair designers are a dime a dozen during playtest. Actually playing some encounters (or a module or a PFS adventure) and giving feedback in the Playtest forum will get you waaay more notice and acknowledgement than any thread that starts with "In my opinion..." or "It should be obvious that..."
...which might be why I've never been dumb enough to start a thread with such a statement. If there's some kind of epidemic of people starting threads with a predictable pattern of distinctly vapid language, I call that a sign of a serious problem.
|
|
...which might be why I've never been dumb enough to start a thread with such a statement. If there's some kind of epidemic of people starting threads with a predictable pattern of distinctly vapid language, I call that a sign of a serious problem.
The boards are practically filthy with people that think they're awesome at design. Theorycrafters and armchair designers are a dime a dozen during playtest. Actually playing some encounters (or a module or a PFS adventure) and giving feedback in the Playtest forum will get you waaay more notice and acknowledgement than any thread that starts with "In my opinion..." or "It should be obvious that..."
It's problematic, but hardly serious. This playtest is actually pretty tame compared to the APG or the birthing of PFRPG. The designers (Paizo employees) usually have to remind folks every week or so that they aren't asking for theorycraft and such, they're asking for people to create characters and play them (hence the term "playtest"). Stick around through a couple playtests and you'll see what I mean.
-Skeld
I feel if those are the only two schools of thought, something's very wrong. Whatever happened to c) don't be an imbecile bean-counter or useless troll and know how to appraise material fairly and constructively, and improve it fairly and creatively, using your brain, bearing in mind that you're trying to be a fantasy adventurer breaking new ground and not an accountant wearing further into a preordained collective groove?There are two schools of thought. Either way, this is the first step:
1) Download the Playtest document here
2) Choose one of the following options (here's where opinions diverge)
a) Make characters using one or more of the classes, run them in some modules, scenarios, adventure paths, single combat encounters, etc. Provide feedback of your experience, along with any suggestions.
Fill out the survey here.
Play some more. Follow the Class Discussion forums here for any changes and update your characters accordingly.
Rinse and repeat.
b) Skim the playtest document and then post on the forums about how overpowered, useless, and/or redundant the class is and accuse Paizo of money-grabbing.
It's actually just a) and c), but some people think any attempt at c) is the same thing as b).
Usually the same kind of people who tell you the monk and rogue are good classes since they always roll 15 or more on all their atributes and have 53 houserules in table. Our fancy maths, controlled trials and comparative analysis mean nothing compared with the one game session where they rolled a bunch of criticals in sequence.|
|
It's actually just a) and c), but some people think any attempt at c) is the same thing as b).
Usually the same kind of people who tell you the monk and rogue are good classes since they always roll 15 or more on all their atributes and have 53 houserules in table. Our fancy maths, controlled trials and comparative analysis mean nothing compared with the one game session where they rolled a bunch of criticals in sequence.
*shrug* Monks and Rogues, insofar as I've played them and seen them played, both seem good enough to me. Their "comme ci comme ca" factor works out well enough. I won't argue that Monks are one of the game's most demanding classes, ability-wise, but I allotted my Monk's points in a manner that might cause some wigs to somersault (middling Dexterity and sacrificing some Constitution for high Strength and a modicum of Intelligence), but she's done fine so far.