The playtest is broken

[tytalan]

Now I’m not talking the Animist itself because there’s no way to actually accurately playtest the class. Why?
Well it’s actually simple it’s a remastered class and we don’t have the classes to compare it to. We’ve been told that casters are getting some cool changes but we don’t know what they are. Are all casters going to get extra spell slots at 10th level like the animist? Are spontaneous casters going to get extra signatures spells? Is the Wildshape focus spell going to be changed? Will Oracles have a feat they can take to add Heal/Harm to spell repertoire? There are simply nothing to compare this class to because to. Even once the players core one comes out we still will lack the information we need because there is only one spontaneous caster in that book and it’s the bard which is very different from other spontaneous casters because of its focus on focus spells.

[John R.]

I believe the best way to approach this particular playtest is to expect Paizo to look more for feedback on what parts we like and leave balancing against other classes to them. Focus on theme and both the ease and fun of mechanics.

[Arachnofiend]

Playtests are less about the actual numbers and more about "this feels good/bad to use" or "this class feels like it should be able to do this, but it doesn't".

[Themetricsystem]

This MIGHT just sound patronizing but I don't mean for it to be, so if it comes off that way please forgive me, the solution to this is pretty simple.

All you need to do is just test the Animist and Exemplar in a party with Fighters, Bards, and Kinetecists since those are the only three Classes that we know won't see substantial changes or significant buffs in the Remaster due to just how potent they already are for Fighter and Bard and Kin being made in parallel with the Remaster.

[tytalan]

Themetricsystem wrote:

This MIGHT just sound patronizing but I don't mean for it to be, so if it comes off that way please forgive me, the solution to this is pretty simple.

All you need to do is just test the Animist and Exemplar in a party with Fighters, Bards, and Kinetecists since those are the only three Classes that we know won't see substantial changes or significant buffs in the Remaster due to just how potent they already are for Fighter and Bard and Kin being made in parallel with the Remaster.

Actually we don’t know about changes to the bard in fact from what they’ve said all casters are getting some significant changes. So that not going to work either.

[tytalan]

Themetricsystem wrote:

This MIGHT just sound patronizing but I don't mean for it to be, so if it comes off that way please forgive me, the solution to this is pretty simple.

All you need to do is just test the Animist and Exemplar in a party with Fighters, Bards, and Kinetecists since those are the only three Classes that we know won't see substantial changes or significant buffs in the Remaster due to just how potent they already are for Fighter and Bard and Kin being made in parallel with the Remaster.

No if that was the cast they wouldn’t want it played in groups for the playtest. Numbers are just as important because one of the reasons for the playtest is to check class balance which we can’t

[Dancing Wind]

tytalan wrote:

because one of the reasons for the playtest is to check class balance

If the designers wanted to check class balance using the playtest, they would have made that possible.

I don't think that the designers are so inept that they all forgot why they were designing the playtest.

[Lanni Talimbi]

If a big response of the playtest is 'Animist is so much more powerful than Witch', then the devs are going to look at that and go 'yeah, to be expected'.

If a big response is 'Earth's Bile is so much more powerful than any other class's focus spells' and the devs look at their notes on the Remaster and the improvements made to other class's focus spells, then they are going to look at that and go 'yeah, to be expected'. And if they look at their notes on the Remaster and there aren't any big changes to focus spell power levels, then they are going to look at that and go 'hmm... maybe that needs looked at'.

If a big response is 'Animist is so much more potent of a spellcaster in general compared to Psychic, Oracle, Sorcerer, or Cleric' then they are going to look at that and go 'hmm... maybe that needs looked at'.

If a big response is 'Sustaining Dance is a must-pick feat tax', they are going to look at that and go 'hmm... maybe that needs looked at'.

I don't think the changes being made in Remaster (other than to the Witch) are going to be big enough to throw off overall class balance.

[WarDriveWorley]

I can see where you're coming from, but I respectfully disagree.

In my view this playtest also offers a tangential remaster playtest as well.

I know at my table We're preparing to run an Animist and Exemplar side by side with a Rogue and Wizard and we're all interested in seeing how the classes stack up. Not so much on a one on one basis, but on a "fully built and tuned chassis" vs "new shiny prototype" and I fully expect Paizo to pour through data for interactions between existing rules/classes ad remastered rules/classes to help fine tune the remaster.

Yeah it'll be a bit clumsy since there's some terms/rules/features that are new/renamed, but overall I expect it'll be fun and useful.

[pauljathome]

WarDriveWorley wrote:

In my view this playtest also offers a tangential remaster playtest as well.

Far, far too late for that. At this point the first remaster books are almost certainly totally and utterly frozen. They may even already have been printed and currently are on a slow boat from China.

[Pronate11]

pauljathome wrote:

WarDriveWorley wrote:

In my view this playtest also offers a tangential remaster playtest as well.

Far, far too late for that. At this point the first remaster books are almost certainly totally and utterly frozen. They may even already have been printed and currently are on a slow boat from China.

I mean, theres a ton of data that could be used for the problem classes that are in the player core 2, which is most likely still being changed. I could totally see some lessons from the animist helping the oracle or alchemist, or maybe lessons from the exemplar helping the swashbuckler or investigator.

[tytalan]

Dancing Wind wrote:

tytalan wrote:

because one of the reasons for the playtest is to check class balance

If the designers wanted to check class balance using the playtest, they would have made that possible.

I don't think that the designers are so inept that they all forgot why they were designing the playtest.

In which case why bother with a play test? If they don’t need to fix the balance why are there so many problems with this classes balance

[breithauptclan]

tytalan wrote:

In which case why bother with a play test? If they don’t need to fix the balance why are there so many problems with this classes balance

Are you actually unable to tell the difference between the two ideas?

The playtest is for the classes being created. It is to see how these new abilities are received by the community, which abilities are chosen consistently, which options are passed by, and if anything that is being created is able to be horribly abused.

That has nothing to do with whether one class is better than another. And it isn't influenced by having one set of cantrips add ability modifier to damage and another that doesn't.

It is certainly harder for us to back-seat developer the design team since we don't have all of the information about the Remaster that they do. But that is a far cry from the playtest being 'broken'.

[tytalan]

breithauptclan wrote:

tytalan wrote:

In which case why bother with a play test? If they don’t need to fix the balance why are there so many problems with this classes balance

Are you actually unable to tell the difference between the two ideas?

The playtest is for the classes being created. It is to see how these new abilities are received by the community, which abilities are chosen consistently, which options are passed by, and if anything that is being created is able to be horribly abused.

That has nothing to do with whether one class is better than another. And it isn't influenced by having one set of cantrips add ability modifier to damage and another that doesn't.

It is certainly harder for us to back-seat developer the design team since we don't have all of the information about the Remaster that they do. But that is a far cry from the playtest being 'broken'.

Maybe you should read the playtest documentation

“ How to Playtest
The playtest will run until October 2nd, 2023. We’re looking for your feedback, comments, and criticisms regarding these classes, but we’re focusing our attention on feedback from play, both online through play-by-post campaigns and VTTs and at home tables for those of you who can play such games safely. Make new characters, use them as PCs or adversaries, and run a few game sessions or encounters using them! Our friends at Demiplane will also be hosting a free preview of their online character building tools, allowing you to build playtest animists and exemplars online! You can visit them at www.pathfindernexus.com/playtest.
Anything can change based on the results of the playtest! These are early iterations of the new classes; some abilities might be a bit extreme or stretch some assumptions of the game, and the best way to find out if we’ve gone too far (or in the wrong direction) is for us to deliver them into your hands. We don’t expect to release any changes during the playtest itself, only in the final book

[Squiggit]

Correct. So there's no problem. You playtest the class and then give feedback.

[Dancing Wind]

I wonder if people are using the same words (class balance) for two different concepts.

The playtest is about testing the balance within the new class. The comparisons the developers are talking about are internal to the class.

The OP seems to be talking about the balance between classes. The comparisons the OP is talking about are external to the class.

tytalan wrote:

we don’t have the classes to compare it to

I read the playtest verbiage as asking us to play characters from the new class, and give feedback about how the new abilities for each class work for that class .

Quote:

some abilities might be a bit extreme

some abilities might ... stretch some assumptions of the game

The devs aren't asking for comparisons with other classes. They're asking about the new abilities within the new class.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean, you should be more specific in your playtest feedback than "this feels bad" or "this feels weak" or whatever. It's also useful to explain why you feel this way, so if the fix to this problem is already addressed in the remaster, the people reading the surveys can take that into account.

[breithauptclan]

Yes.

Squiggit wrote:

Correct. So there's no problem. You playtest the class and then give feedback.

That

Dancing Wind wrote:

I wonder if people are using the same words (class balance) for two different concepts.

and that.

Also remember that the playtest is not for our benefit directly. If we can't answer all of the questions that we want to answer, that isn't a problem. The playtest is so that Michael Sayre and other developers can answer the questions that they have.

The playtest is for our benefit indirectly. That we will end up with new classes that will be fun to play. None of us are going to get everything exactly as we want it. That is not possible because we all want different things. That is what houserules are for.