Revised Ranger update

[Yunru]

Had previously done so; per Crawford this has changed. Hence why they are not pursuing their experiments.

And where, exactly, was the second survey? Oh right, they didn't do one.
Just like you said would be insane to not do.

 

[Parmandur]

I'd hazard a guess that many of the same people answering the D&D surveys are the same people on the forums - including those so-called dozen folks, so the greater playerbase has generally always been inconsequential. But yes, your point stands that the data gained through a survey is easier to analyse and quantify.

Well, the surveys get hundreds of thousands of individual responses: way more than participate on any forum combined.

 

[Parmandur]

And where, exactly, was the second survey? Oh right, they didn't do one.
Just like you said would be insane to not do.

They run surveys constantly, and have big data information from D&D Beyond.

 

[Yunru]

They run surveys constantly, and have big data information from D&D Beyond.

Yeah I'm sure D&D Beyond is a great way to tell what people are playing given the way it tracks character builds.
If I used D&D Beyond, for instance, they'd have at least five characters who are rangers just from my attempts to build a beastmaster that was decent to play, even though I don't intend on playing one.

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, there is no "point" insofar as WotC doesn't read the forums, and this discussion will have no effect on the overall game. This is all of us sharing our opinions. Nothing more, nothing less. Disagreement is not trolling, but discussion.

It was not disagreement I was talking about. Disagreeing is perfectly fine.

 

[CapnZapp]

You keeping using this phrase "good enough," but again: "enough" on what metric?

If you are going to pretend you don't know what criticism that is directed at the PHB Beastmaster, I don't understand what you're doing in this thread.

If the subclass is meeting their metrics, then by definition it is "good enough."

Bollocks. Don't you have an opinion? A critical mind of your own?

Sheesh.

 

[CapnZapp]

Yes, voices on the Internet are inconsequential, or more accurately, statiscially irrelevant. WotC stopped participation in forums around the time that they let it be known that their research demonstrated that forum received opinion was often close to the opposite of popular opinion and taste. While they will communicate on mass social media, they aren't making decisions based on those voices.

And telling us this in every thread daring to find faults with WotC's material is exactly what I consider trolling.

Why are you even here?

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah I'm sure D&D Beyond is a great way to tell what people are playing given the way it tracks character builds.
If I used D&D Beyond, for instance, they'd have at least five characters who are rangers just from my attempts to build a beastmaster that was decent to play, even though I don't intend on playing one.

They have ways of cleaning the data to focus in on PCs actually being played.

 

[Parmandur]

It was not disagreement I was talking about. Disagreeing is perfectly fine.

Easy to be mistaken about your meaning , as you were responding to folks disagreeing with your opinions.

 

[Yunru]

They have ways of cleaning the data to focus in on PCs actually being played.

I see, you must work for them then, no? Surely that's not a baseless assumption?