So, my group and I finally got together to play the second batch of the playtest. I was a player this time around, and our group was composed of the following characters:
- A Lightfood Halfling Fighter. He had the Thug background and the Survivor speciality, and the slayer fighting style.
- A Human Wizard (me!). I had the Sage background and the Necromancer speciality.
- A Wood Elf Rogue. He had the Soldier/Thief backgrounds and the Lurker speciality.
- A Human Sorcerer. He had the Knight background and the Jack of all Trades speciality.
All of the characters used the following array when determining stats: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
If you're not looking to read through the whole thing, here's a few comments our group had on the mechanics we faced in the session:
- The wood elf rogue was mostly ranged, but he was adamant on not choosing the sharpshooter speciality as he didn't like the sound of the rapid shot ability. I explained to him that it could be useful against a large number of weaker enemies, but he simply told me that he didn't want to deal half damage on his attacks. He's not the type that dives too deep into mechanics and the reasoning behind them, but it didn't appeal to him at all which suggests a change might be in order. The same would go for the dual wielder speciality, I guess. The player ended up choosing the lurker speciality, which is almost too good to pass up as a rogue. It helped him get his sneak attacks in, which is always good.
- The halfling fighter was very happy with the combat superiority mechanic and enjoyed having to make decisions on how to use deadly strike and parry maneuvers tactically in combat. However, the glancing blow combat maneuver proved to be incredibly disappointing. With a dexterity stat of 16 and a base attack of +3, his attack bonus with his short sword came up to a total of +6. Glancing blow allows you to deal damage if you miss a target but roll a 10 or higher, but there is only one creature in the entire bestiary that this would ever work on, which has an AC of 17. The player was understandably frustrated and wished he had chosen another fighting style. Maybe this will start to work out at higher level fights, but why make it a 1st level option, then?
- The sorcerer did not overshadow the wizard as much as I feared when I first read through the guides. We both used the same array when deciding ability scores, but since he wanted to be viable in melee he had to allocate some of his stat bonuses to strength, ending up with a STR of 16 and CHA of 16. Meanwhile, I could focus entirely on INT and had a score of 18. His magic attack bonus was at a +5 while mine was at a +7, which is actually quite considerable at first level, and my spell DCs were higher. Sure, he had a higher AC and could go into melee, but his damage output was reliant on a finite amount of resources, just like mine was, and I had a more flexible spell selection. I think this might change at higher levels, but I won't comment on that yet. The sorcerer's melee attacks were also not as accurate or effective as that of the fighter which is understandably very good.
- The new opportunity attack mechanic felt too harsh. In the first playtest players could move around freely, maybe overly so, but provoking an attack and granting advantage made sure we didn't want to move around in combat at all. It felt very clunky and we didn't like it, especially since none of us had any abilities to prevent the attack.
- The HP threshold mechanic I spoke about in another thread confirmed my previous predictions: it encourages metagaming in a very bad way. I really had to mull over whether or not to use my Ray of Enfeeblement on a powerful enemy since I didn't want to use it if the enemy had more than 25 max HP since I wouldn't get full mileage out of it. I was pretty bummed.
- We did just fine without a designated healer which was great. Nobody felt like playing a cleric, so we just healed up using short rests and healing kits and everything worked out well. We didn't take a lot of damage though, so maybe we need more time to test things out.
- We felt as if player HP was a bit low. While the fighter had a ridiculous 17 HP thanks to the survivor speciality, the rest of us had 6-10 HP. A single hit of only 4 damage brought the rogue down to half HP, and without a healer he couldn't really have gone much further without dying. We felt as if this was a bit too fragile for first level characters and preferred the way HP was handled in the first batch of the playtest.
- Monsters had a pretty hard time hitting the more armored members of the party. The hardest monster we faced (a wight) had only a +2 bonus to attack rolls and didn't get a single hit off against our fighter. Maybe this is a good thing since he was decently defensively oriented, but I think that a higher chance of monsters hitting with less overall damage might be better.
- There was no mention of when the sorcerer would be able to use his dragon breath ability, but I guess that's been mentioned before. Still confusing.
- Our fighter and rogue complained about a lack of physical skills such as acrobatics, athletics and swim, and I agree with them. Shouldn't be too hard to implement!
The playtest report itself will continue in the next post.
- A Lightfood Halfling Fighter. He had the Thug background and the Survivor speciality, and the slayer fighting style.
- A Human Wizard (me!). I had the Sage background and the Necromancer speciality.
- A Wood Elf Rogue. He had the Soldier/Thief backgrounds and the Lurker speciality.
- A Human Sorcerer. He had the Knight background and the Jack of all Trades speciality.
All of the characters used the following array when determining stats: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
If you're not looking to read through the whole thing, here's a few comments our group had on the mechanics we faced in the session:
- The wood elf rogue was mostly ranged, but he was adamant on not choosing the sharpshooter speciality as he didn't like the sound of the rapid shot ability. I explained to him that it could be useful against a large number of weaker enemies, but he simply told me that he didn't want to deal half damage on his attacks. He's not the type that dives too deep into mechanics and the reasoning behind them, but it didn't appeal to him at all which suggests a change might be in order. The same would go for the dual wielder speciality, I guess. The player ended up choosing the lurker speciality, which is almost too good to pass up as a rogue. It helped him get his sneak attacks in, which is always good.
- The halfling fighter was very happy with the combat superiority mechanic and enjoyed having to make decisions on how to use deadly strike and parry maneuvers tactically in combat. However, the glancing blow combat maneuver proved to be incredibly disappointing. With a dexterity stat of 16 and a base attack of +3, his attack bonus with his short sword came up to a total of +6. Glancing blow allows you to deal damage if you miss a target but roll a 10 or higher, but there is only one creature in the entire bestiary that this would ever work on, which has an AC of 17. The player was understandably frustrated and wished he had chosen another fighting style. Maybe this will start to work out at higher level fights, but why make it a 1st level option, then?
- The sorcerer did not overshadow the wizard as much as I feared when I first read through the guides. We both used the same array when deciding ability scores, but since he wanted to be viable in melee he had to allocate some of his stat bonuses to strength, ending up with a STR of 16 and CHA of 16. Meanwhile, I could focus entirely on INT and had a score of 18. His magic attack bonus was at a +5 while mine was at a +7, which is actually quite considerable at first level, and my spell DCs were higher. Sure, he had a higher AC and could go into melee, but his damage output was reliant on a finite amount of resources, just like mine was, and I had a more flexible spell selection. I think this might change at higher levels, but I won't comment on that yet. The sorcerer's melee attacks were also not as accurate or effective as that of the fighter which is understandably very good.
- The new opportunity attack mechanic felt too harsh. In the first playtest players could move around freely, maybe overly so, but provoking an attack and granting advantage made sure we didn't want to move around in combat at all. It felt very clunky and we didn't like it, especially since none of us had any abilities to prevent the attack.
- The HP threshold mechanic I spoke about in another thread confirmed my previous predictions: it encourages metagaming in a very bad way. I really had to mull over whether or not to use my Ray of Enfeeblement on a powerful enemy since I didn't want to use it if the enemy had more than 25 max HP since I wouldn't get full mileage out of it. I was pretty bummed.
- We did just fine without a designated healer which was great. Nobody felt like playing a cleric, so we just healed up using short rests and healing kits and everything worked out well. We didn't take a lot of damage though, so maybe we need more time to test things out.
- We felt as if player HP was a bit low. While the fighter had a ridiculous 17 HP thanks to the survivor speciality, the rest of us had 6-10 HP. A single hit of only 4 damage brought the rogue down to half HP, and without a healer he couldn't really have gone much further without dying. We felt as if this was a bit too fragile for first level characters and preferred the way HP was handled in the first batch of the playtest.
- Monsters had a pretty hard time hitting the more armored members of the party. The hardest monster we faced (a wight) had only a +2 bonus to attack rolls and didn't get a single hit off against our fighter. Maybe this is a good thing since he was decently defensively oriented, but I think that a higher chance of monsters hitting with less overall damage might be better.
- There was no mention of when the sorcerer would be able to use his dragon breath ability, but I guess that's been mentioned before. Still confusing.
- Our fighter and rogue complained about a lack of physical skills such as acrobatics, athletics and swim, and I agree with them. Shouldn't be too hard to implement!
The playtest report itself will continue in the next post.