User avatar
aramis
Topic Author
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri 14 Jun 2019, 20:34
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Feedback from Play

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 16:11

Group notes: I and one of my players, TH, have run 1E. TH, SH, myself, EO & GD have all played 1E; GD & EO only twice, the rest multiple campaigns of several months. SA and SB have not played 1E prior.
Many of the group are on the Autism Spectrum; this tends to make us a bit picky about clarity of process. I am GMing.

We have played 2 sessions; the first session was SH, SA and EO. Our typical sessions are 4-6 hours. Char gen for 3 was done in under an hour by sharing tables.

The casting:
EO as Odo Goodbody, Halfling Messenger
SH as Violet Rushlight, Breelander Scholar
SA as Brand, Barding Treasure Hunter
TH as Frerin, Son of Cian, Son of Bror, Dwarf Captain
GD as Ciramdir, aka "Grey", Ranger Warden
SB as Mythrilion, Elf (don't recall calling.)

Everyone is complaining about target numbers feeling too high. Almost universally, we come to the "2 to 3 points too high"... directly comparable to the loss of favored attributes... A skill 3 is not feeling competent
The removal of the 6d6 cap is appreciated, as is the counting of multiple Ꞇ runes beyond 2.

The term Shadow test probably should go away, and replace Shadow Test (Dread) with Dread Test, and Shadow Test (Greed) with Greed Test
I am uncertain whether or not I like the add it then reduce the add with the shadow test phrasing; as it sits, it implies that, when making the test, if the gained amount, for example the three from Strike Fear, should trigger Miserable before rolling to resist it.

The Travel encounter samples are too few to be useful. Ideally, there should be three per combination of target skill and effect; 1 for each skill, and 1 for choice of either. This also is a process issue, in that, as written, until the player picks the skull, a suitable challenge cannot be narrated by the GM, and this both slows play and can result in incoherent results for large parties where 2 can be expected on 1 to all non-Guide roles.

The lack of an edge stat is annoying for me; it's poor modeling of weapons. Especially since Keen effectively is forcing remembering it separately anyway.

The removal of Backgrounds is not happy. All former players were annoyed by its removal.

There was disappointment amongst most of the loss of cultural Rewards.

We're all unhappy with the nerf of Traits. In discussion, the consensus was that traits should add a die and not affect the value of hope.

We're all unhappy with Hope adding a die and being spent before the roll. The consensus is that it's too weak. Most are only applying hope when they get two dice from it.
The suggestions amongst the group generally want to see it after the roll, and would prefer a fixed value, not a roll.

When I let them know that helping requires spending a hope, they were all grumbling. It didn't stop them from spending it, but there was grumbling.

Given the issue of TN's, No one was willing to take an attribute set with a 2. 3 was as low as it got, and then, only one of them.

Monsters with skill 2 are missing most of the time, even with hate, against the combat-focused builds. All but one of the NPC hits was due to a sauron; hitting the ranger is almost impossible

I had a hard time noticing the red text indicating favoured skills on the cultural skills; this is because the not-quite black and the dark red resolve to be almost identical on my eInk table, which is my primary device for rulebooks, especially since some players are remote, and thus a VTT is in used on the laptop

The weapon list is too short, and missing a few important elements...
There's no thrown axe; hatchets as thrown weapons go back to the late bronze age.
We'd prefer a brawling skill to defaulting off best combat for brawling.

There's no provision for common nor frugal to buy/rent horses in the current draft.

The hex size for travel needs to be specified in the rules.

We are, largely, having fun, but... this feels too simplified.

We love that favoured now actually makes a strong difference

We're good with the new rolling mechanic, just not the TN's as currently set.

I miss the 1E spells methods; they were flavorful, and diverted AP from advancing skills, but were worth it.

The Magical Success is not clear about whether it's truly magic, or just skill. It's also unclear if such use triggers an increase in Eye Score.

I used a fail forward when the party blew the get a boat across the anduin persuasion test: the boatman demanded their names. The elf used a magical success. I treated that as a 1 point spell.
—————————————————————————
Smith & Wesson: the original point and click interface...
 
baldrick0712
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri 28 May 2021, 12:29

Re: Feedback from Play

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 17:00

Requiring Hope just to assist someone does seem weird. A: "Can't budge this on my own, can you help?". B: "Nah, not feeling hopeful enough about our quest to be arsed".
 
Themadviolinist
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat 10 Jul 2021, 16:01

Re: Feedback from Play

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 17:11

Shoot! I had forgotten about the hope requirement for helping. I'll have to dock my characters some hope, since they made liberal use of it.
I suppose I can make a thematic argument for hope and helping, hope as a proxy for engagement in the group's endeavors, but really, it feels like a balancing mechanic to keep the players from helping on every roll.
 
RichKarp
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 19:37

Re: Feedback from Play

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 18:53

This is excellent play test feedback.
We love that favoured now actually makes a strong difference

We're good with the new rolling mechanic, just not the TN's as currently set.
Would you mind unpacking these two comments a little? How did you think Favoured measures up to the new tougher TNs? And also, what specifically do you mean here by “rolling mechanic”?
 
gyrovague
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: Feedback from Play

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 18:56

We're all unhappy with Hope adding a die and being spent before the roll. The consensus is that it's too weak. Most are only applying hope when they get two dice from it.
The suggestions amongst the group generally want to see it after the roll, and would prefer a fixed value, not a roll.
Consider making it +1d6, and an additional +Attribute if Inspired. Makes it possible to rescue rolls that miss by a little bit, even if not Inspired, but makes it quite powerful with Inspired, which in turn boosts all the currently lackluster mechanics around Inspired (Distinctive Features, some Virtues)


Good feedback in general. Much of it not surprising.
 
User avatar
aramis
Topic Author
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri 14 Jun 2019, 20:34
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Feedback from Play

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 02:14

One thing first, at other posters: I am not looking for houserules, and won't even read suggestions for them through. Why? I am more than capable of doing my own to my own tastes; I've already got plans for some - but they're utterly irrelevant until playtesting is done.
This is excellent play test feedback.
We love that favoured now actually makes a strong difference

We're good with the new rolling mechanic, just not the TN's as currently set.
Would you mind unpacking these two comments a little? How did you think Favoured measures up to the new tougher TNs? And also, what specifically do you mean here by “rolling mechanic”?
In reverse order
The TN's are, in our opinions 2 to 3 points too high; doing the math with Gandalf=20 (a guaranteed meets all possible TNs in this edition, except potentially attacks vs very potent foes.
The new rolling mechanic being altering the number of dice, rather than the TN. This has been the typical failure range for skill 3 characters; 4 dice gives a wide flat zone

Skill 3 is supposed to be "good" or "experienced" (see page 30's table) - competent. A quick anydice calculation... using TN 16 (
Skill 3F: F=26.68 S=73.32	
Skill 3:  F=45.83 S=54.17	
Skill 2F: F=55.67 S=44.33	
Skill 2:  F=72.69 S=27.31
2 favoured is slightly better than 3 base at successes, considerably worse for success levels.
This is intuitively true to us, and doing the math after, confirms it. Favoured is about as valuable as an extra die.
output 3d6 + 1@2d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} > 15
output 3d6 + 1d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20}  > 15
output 2d6 + 1@2d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} > 15 
output 2d6 + 1d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} >16 >15
output 3d6 + 1@2d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} 
output 3d6 + 1d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} 
output 2d6 + 1@2d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} 
output 2d6 + 1d{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,20} 
compared

For attributes: 5 is the median attribute; 4 is the mode, 4⅔ is the mean. the most common TN is thus 16. That puts it 2 points higher than 1E's default TN 14.
For reasons of GMing speed of response, I MUCH prefer, especially when using a VTT, to be the determiner of the TN, so I can quickly assess the roll, often before the player has even done the math. 40 years GMing has made sums of 2d6 to 4d6 come pretty quick;

First Ed Favoured skills only mattered when Hope was spent, or in experience. This is because they changed from add the base to add the favoured level. This made them almost worthless, since hope was so tight that favoured or not was almost never an issue; most times hope was spent, the extra 1-3 for favoured was not determinant, merely the base; by changing favoured to adding dice, they sidestepped this. It was cumbersome in 1E, 2E is more elegant... but far more whiffy.

More, that I didn't get to because it was 5AM
It's bloody hard to find things without a search feature. There are two conditions not labeled as such and not in the conditions section. Some are unclear.

Poisoned is treated in almost all ways as a condition, except for being on page 22. It's durable, and causes continuing effects. What it doesn't do, as written, is say if it prevents recovering End; if not, then it's application at "end of day" means the immediately following prolonged rest recovers it all... unless you're wounded and down to a low end.

Daunted is a condition imposed by certain foes. (p 152 - Great Cave Troll: Strike Fear). It should be added to Conditions on 22.
Recovery for various things isn't conveniently together; adding a fourth section to chapter 6, specifically about rests and recovery.

The question was raised, "Is there a benefit for songs at Long Rest?" (note that my players "corrected" Prolonged Rest to Long Rest. The only apparent uses for songs are for short rests and councils

The skill lists a number of uses for each skill... many of which have mechanics in combat, travel, or council. It would be very nice to have those page references in the skills section.

Everyone seemed annoyed by "one endeavor per party" in Fellowship Phase (p121). It turned into a 15 minute discussion each time. That Yule works differently hasn't become relevant yet

The benefits of rests are incomplete. Noting that prolonged rests in safe places provide for a travel roll on the first night, and 1 per additional night would be useful on the p71 section.

The situations required to count a day towards wound severity are unspecified. Is it a day of rest? Or a day of whatever?

Several players, upon seeing the 4 column attribute table, automatically assumed roll once for each attribute... a problem not present under 1E, since the roll was for background, which then provided the atts.

There's no table for rolling the origin of blessed items, only precious ones. Precious items should have a guideline for "general values"...
The precious item materials table lacks metals. Some ornate precious items should be valuable metals alone.
Precious Items cultures are missing the Númenóreans, Hobbits, Elves of Wilderland and the wilds of Eregion (The last Homely House), and even an "other" entry.
I dislike horde sizes being tied to number of players. It should be, IMO, based upon the hoard's gatherer.

My players were thrilled to receive some magic items, even if they did bring shadow. They got a Hunting Horn, an elven cloak (hide), and a Collar once belonging to a Captain in Beleriand (Awe)... They have yet to use them.
—————————————————————————
Smith & Wesson: the original point and click interface...
 
gyrovague
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: Feedback from Play

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 02:18

One thing first, at other posters: I am not looking for houserules, and won't even read suggestions for them through. Why? I am more than capable of doing my own to my own tastes; I've already got plans for some - but they're utterly irrelevant until playtesting is done.
Ooooookay. Duly noted.
 
RichKarp
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 19:37

Re: Feedback from Play

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 02:49

Thanks Aramis, this is really good stuff. Especially the math and rules indexing.
 
Elenath
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun 18 Jul 2021, 00:22

Re: Feedback from Play

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 05:27

Thanks Aramis, this is really good stuff. Especially the math and rules indexing.
Ditto
 
User avatar
aramis
Topic Author
Posts: 668
Joined: Fri 14 Jun 2019, 20:34
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Feedback from Play

Thu 22 Jul 2021, 05:18

Thanks Aramis, this is really good stuff. Especially the math and rules indexing.
Ditto
You're welcome. I'll post more after sunday night's session, if there's anything further to post
—————————————————————————
Smith & Wesson: the original point and click interface...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests