April's D&D Feedback Survey Results

WotC has revealed the results of its latest monthly feedback survey. Last month's survey dealt with game scheduling habits, character races, and Adventurer's League content. Additionally, a new survey has been posted covering problem spells, the DRAGON+ mobile app, and the Waterborne Adventures UA column.

The new survey is here. April's survey results are here, but below is a quick list of the take-home points.

• It turns out that that 1st-6th level games are still the most common a year after D&D 5E's launch.
• The most likely end point of a campaign is 10th-12th level.
• There is a preference for more open, sandboxy adventures.
• Smaller races are seen as weaker options.
• Adventurer's League content is reasonably well received, with specifically designed adventures more popular than Tyranny of Dragons adaptions for AL.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If the majority wanted sandboxes, Pathfinder would be out of business. Makes me wonder about the validity of the survey.

It's not a one or the other type of thing.

 

[Zaran]

My main gripe was I felt many spells were underpowered and listed the ones I really dislike. Please take the time to do the same.

 

[ZeshinX]

I think the desire for more sandboxy adventures is a way for the customer base to indicate they want setting-specific info to be more front and center, instead of the storyline. If all they're going to get is adventure/storyline modules and very little to any setting-specific or core game expanding published product, sandboxy is the way to ask for it.

The two published storyline books...well, for me, the storylines suck. I don't care about WotC's storylines. At all. I want material I can use for my own storylines/adventures. The two storyline products' don't cut it (the content they do offer that is or can be mostly generic just isn't enough to justify the cost of buying them). Sandboxy adventures offer the ability to provide far more setting content than currently, which I would guess their audience is actually wanting.

 

[justinj3x3]

If the majority wanted sandboxes, Pathfinder would be out of business. Makes me wonder about the validity of the survey.

That's my concern. I always see it said that internet forums are a small percentage of the fanbase and therefore the opinions found here are a minority... so what percentage of the fanbase is dictating the future of D&D with their surveys?

 

[Delandel]

In this survey I called out Crown of Madness as the prime example of Wizards nerfing Enchantment (and offensive Illusion) spells too hard. They used to be too powerful in 3e and now the majority of them are absolutely terrible.

Also, please nerf Polymorph. My barbarian friend wouldn't let me hear the end of it when, at level 7, I turned into a Giant Ape and out-barbarian'd him.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

IMO, sandboxes as adventures seem to miss the point. They're gazeteers with plot hooks and some maps. The level of detail in an adventure product is usually pointless in a sandbox, as you arent expected to use all of it. The parts your PC's dont explore is wasted design time. So why detail 15 rooms of a dungeon a party might never set foot in?

The Paizo regional companions are perfect for this sort of thing. 64 pages of campaign detail, organizations, important NPC's, locales and hooks.

The difference is this: I can use a sandbox setting more than once, and often more than once with the same group. When I design sandbox content those areas that are overlooked or ignored in one session may become relevant or interesting later on, either by the same group or a different one.

With the adventure paths, once I've run it for my group it's done, finished....I can't use it again until I have an entirely different group. In my area, I do have two regular groups, but a couple players are in both my Wednesday and Saturday groups. This makes it hard to run adventure paths more than once.

Sandbox content, by virtue of the fact that it has more content than you will need, makes it more versatile and reusable.

 

[lvl20dm]

I don't think they rely solely on surveys for addressing issues or creating content. Probably just a small part of the puzzle, really.

The small races thing is strange. Gnomes (Gnome Cunning!) and Halflings (Lucky!) are very good. Might this just be a psychological thing?

 

[Jester David]

Unsurprisingly, the awkwardly ported Encounters adventures are not popular. Because "hey, play 1/4 of this campaign and end in the middle of a story beat" is a tricky sell.
I am surprised most people play weekly. That seems very often. I would have guessed monthly or bi-weekly. Guess a lot of people are really making time for D&D.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Also, please nerf Polymorph. My barbarian friend wouldn't let me hear the end of it when, at level 7, I turned into a Giant Ape and out-barbarian'd him.

I'd tell him to stop whining, because polymorph is very limited in the # of times you can use it (you have to use an extremely important spell slot), it requires concentration (meaning each time you take damage you have to make a save), and it only lasts an hour. He can barbarian all freaking day long.

 

[aramis erak]

If the majority wanted sandboxes, Pathfinder would be out of business. Makes me wonder about the validity of the survey.

The survey has an issue in that it's open entry. Which, while not making it totally invalid, makes it less than reliable.