| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My group was off last week coincidentally just like the forums. This week however we had a brief game.
Having leveled up to 2 at the end of last session, I was eager to see if they party felt any more competent, (the main benefit to leveling in my view). The party faced off against a team of Orc adventurers, a Paladin, Sorcerer, and Monk. The party's tactics had improved, which allowed the rogue to get two good sneak attack bow strikes off and take down the Sorcerer, but exactly as at 1st level everything was down to the dice. None of the characters really seemed any better at using their abilities because as their skill, attack, and defense numbers had grown, so too did the target numbers. The paladin particularly was difficult to deal with, due to high AC (half-plate, heavy shield when raised) & self healing, and probably would have taken out at least one party member before the party could deal with him... except a crit happened. The PC Rogue was on the ropes against the Monk, again until a crit happened, with a Deadly weapon no less. Overall it felt more like a contest of pure luck than any kind of skill. The only way in which player characters felt as though they had grown was by having higher max HP.
Going forward, I'm going to go off-script and begin adjusting rules in ways that I think will make for a better experience. If anyone is interested, I can post the changes I make and what effect they have, but otherwise my time with a "by the book" playtest has ended.
People may actually need more info for this to be relevant.
Like did your group of four 2nd level characters take on a group of four second level characters? Then sure, it could come down to crits.
Also, even in first edition I'm not terribly sure second level characters feel more powerful than first level ones.
I don't like the +1 per level to everything either but as a tester this doesn't help much.
People may actually need more info for this to be relevant.
Like did your group of four 2nd level characters take on a group of four second level characters? Then sure, it could come down to crits.
Also, even in first edition I'm not terribly sure second level characters feel more powerful than first level ones.
I don't like the +1 per level to everything either but as a tester this doesn't help much.
Yes, four 2nd Level PCs. A Rogue, an Alchemist, a Cleric, and a Sorcerer.
vs.
Three 2nd Level NPCs (as stated, a Paladin, a Sorcerer, and a Monk.)
Setting: Forest (plenty of trees and brush for cover/conceal)
Entire battle description (if you're bored)
As stated, the Rogue got in two shortbow Strikes with Sneak Attack (not only was the Rogue hidden to begin with, but Surprise Attack meant that those who hadn't acted yet were automatically flat-footed). Good damage rolls took the O Sorcerer out right away. Third action was step into concealment.
The PC Sorcerer had next initiative. Ray of Frost on Paladin, miss. PC Sorcerer used final action to Stride backwards slightly and get further out of danger.
Alchemist used an imbued Alchemist flame to attack, hit O Paladin, splashed O Monk. Tossed a second only to splash. Drew Weapon.
O Paladin used Lay on Hands to heal some of the bomb damage, Raised Shield, and Stride towards Alchemist.
O Monk used Stride to get to the area where Rogue had fired from, Activated Tiger Style, used Seek to try to locate Rogue, but failed.
Cleric used two Stride to reach O Paladin, made one Strike, missed.
Rogue made a Stealth Roll to ensure Sneak attack, took two Shortbow Strike attempts at O Monk, hit first missed Second. First got Sneak Attack damage.
PC Sorcerer tried another Ray of Frost on O Paladin, missed by even more since his shield was Raised.
Alchemist saw Paladin wasn't in melee range, and used another Imbued Alchemist Flame, Hit O Paladin, splashed Cleric. Used Stride to increase distance.
O Paladin took two Strike actions at Cleric, hit with both. Cleric at 5 HP left. Raised Shield.
O Monk used a Stride to Rogue, Flurry of Blows. First hit, second would have hit, but Rogue used Nimble Dodge reaction. O Monk used a Strike as final action, hit. Rogue at 4 HP.
Cleric uses Strike on O Paladin (with Plans to Heal and use Shield Cantrip as 2nd and 3rd actions), Critically Hits, O Paladin drops (luckily Retributive Strike was forgotten about, or Cleric most likely would have been dropped as well). Cleric now uses Heal, and Stride to move towards O Monk.
Rogue uses Feint, succeeds. Rogue drops shortbow, uses Quick Draw to draw and Strike with Rapier, rolls 11 over and sneak attack deadly crits O Monk into oblivion.
It wasn't a bad battle, but it felt no better performance wise than their 1st lv battles. The Rogue was the best damage dealer at 1st as well, due to using a bow and rolling well consistently. Alchemist also rolled well, and did well. Cleric has up and down rolls, has up and down combat ability. Sorcerer always rolls poorly, feels ineffective. Everything came down to what the die rolled, and their slightly bigger number was meaningless because the enemy's number was slightly bigger by the exact amount. Sure 1st to 2nd usually isn't much of a boost, but this didn't feel like any kind of boost. It made me realise that the way leveling and the proficiency degree bonuses were, it would never feel like much of a boost as everything will always be heavily reliant on the rolls (because bonuses don't increase enough for most classes to change that) --unless the party routinely faced lower level opponents (which with the new experience system would be barely worth it). To put it into a visual metaphor, the characters grew an inch but weren't any taller because the world grew an inch as well.
My group has done some playtesting at lvl 12. Same struggling. "Best" proficiency and maxed skills are barely enough to do anything, because monsters are routinely running a bit ahead of the group in power.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To nail down something more specific, since everyone advances at the same pace now, there's much less sense of differentiation (which is odd given that they went to pains to preserve class ability niches). In RPGs there's usually some characters and creatures that are the physical type, or the magic type, or the sneaky type, or so on. With everyone advancing the same, there's very little difference between any of those in pf2. Sure a fighter has more options of what kind of attacks to use, but they might only have a +1 or +2 better chance to hit than a Wizard (until the last half of levels), and that feels like a "within the margin of error" degree of difference. Likewise a Barbarian who takes Stealth as a trained skill will be just about as good as a Rogue at sneaking, again down to a +1 or +2 difference (until master and legend skills become available). Even when the higher levels kick in, those differences are likely to stay +3 to +4.
Do you remember how some people complained in PF1 that Weapon Focus was a bad feat because it only added a +1 and nothing more? This feels like an entire edition of that.