D&D 5E Volo's 5e vs Tasha's 5e where do you see 5e heading?

[ph0rk]

They probably have a margin of error involved,

The only method of calculating this without population level data requires assuming your sample is unbiased and subbing in your sample standard deviation to calculate a standard error.

That assumption is entirely wrong.

but they have quite extensive market research at their disposal through Hasbro.

Not even Hasbro can (or will) field a full census of all players of 5e.

 

[Parmandur]

The only method of calculating this without population level data requires assuming your sample is unbiased and subbing in your sample standard deviation to calculate a standard error.

That assumption is entirely wrong.



Not even Hasbro can (or will) field a full census of all players of 5e.

They don't need a full census to get actionable data.

 

[ph0rk]

They don't need a full census to get actionable data.

They need a sampling frame to get unbiased estimates.

They can act on biased estimates, but that has risks which should be obvious.

At any rate, without unbiased data, we can't trust anything they say about who does or does not use feats.

 

[Parmandur]

They need a sampling frame to get unbiased estimates.

They can act on biased estimates, but that has risks which should be obvious.

At any rate, without unbiased data, we can't trust anything they say about who does or does not use feats.

Inconvenient facts might not be attractive to you, but that doesn't change that most people are not using Feats.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

When D&D Beyond looks at this data, they only include characters that have been updated (granted, I can't remember how many times).

Source? I've repeatedly suggested this should be done but it definitely was the case in any figures I saw, hence the suggestion. If they've changed that, great, but without a source I 100% do not believe it.

@Minigiant's list of game changes are on a whole other level from adding a couple of dozen feats, wouldn't you agree?

Haven't seen them, don't know.

So, no, it's not "impossible to say" if the characters have been played or not.

Source. This definitely was not the case in any of the earlier data dumps. If this is correct there was a more recent one I missed with a new strategy.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Inconvenient facts might not be attractive to you, but that doesn't change that most people are not using Feats.

As noted, we don't have any evidence that this is a "fact". That people keep repeating it is, frankly, demonstrative of so much of what is wrong with the world. The inability to distinguish belief from fact, even by intelligent people, is a big problem.

So far we have two unsourced unsubstantiated claims. One from you, one from Hussar. You've claimed Crawford has claimed that most people don't use Feats, alluded to it being in a video somewhere, and given out a 30% figure. I'm certainly willing to believe only 30% of characters have a Feat once we take a lot of things into account (i.e. that most characters are under L10 being the main factor), but it's unsourced. Much more extreme is Hussar's claim which is that DNDBeyond suddenly changed the methodology of their data dumps and according to Hussar are now only including characters who have had XP added to their character sheets (presumably and/or been levelled up manually). It's entirely possible that's true. But it's an unsourced claim at this point and Google ain't turning up nothing on it. I can only find earlier stuff where that wasn't the case.

 

[Parmandur]

Source? I've repeatedly suggested this should be done but it definitely was the case in any figures I saw, hence the suggestion. If they've changed that, great, but without a source I 100% do not believe it.

Haven't seen them, don't know.

Source. This definitely was not the case in any of the earlier data dumps. If this is correct there was a more recent one I missed with a new strategy.

Adam repeatedly detailed, on these forums even, how they filtered the results based on a few factors to include only actively played characters. He never fully detailed their filtering strategy, probably because some of their algorithms are proprietary information. But they were always filtered numbers, not raw umber including tesr characters.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Adam repeatedly detailed, on these forums even, how they filtered the results based on a few factors to include only actively played characters. He never fully detailed their filtering strategy, probably because some of their algorithms are proprietary information. But they were always filtered numbers, not raw umber including tesr characters.

When, where? Source or it didn't happen, frankly.

I've only seen figures which were not filtered in that way. They certainly weren't "always" filtered this way because the early figures were specifically criticised for being unfiltered. I remember some slightly later ones which had some laughable filtering on them, but it wasn't filtering for actively-played characters. If you just keep posting unsourced claims and saying "FACTS!!!!" (esp. "inconvenient facts" like you're goddamn Al Gore lol) you're just proving my point.

 

[Parmandur]

As noted, we don't have any evidence that this is a "fact". That people keep repeating it is, frankly, demonstrative of so much of what is wrong with the world. The inability to distinguish belief from fact, even by intelligent people, is a big problem.

So far we have two unsourced unsubstantiated claims. One from you, one from Hussar. You've claimed Crawford has claimed that most people don't use Feats, alluded to it being in a video somewhere, and given out a 30% figure. I'm certainly willing to believe only 30% of characters have a Feat once we take a lot of things into account (i.e. that most characters are under L10 being the main factor), but it's unsourced. Much more extreme is Hussar's claim which is that DNDBeyond suddenly changed the methodology of their data dumps and according to Hussar are now only including characters who have had XP added to their character sheets (presumably and/or been levelled up manually). It's entirely possible that's true. But it's an unsourced claim at this point and Google ain't turning up nothing on it. I can only find earlier stuff where that wasn't the case.

There is no new change, Beyond's data is always filtered to only show characters actually seeing use in play, per Adam in all of of relevant videos.

 

[Parmandur]

When, where? Source or it didn't happen, frankly.

I've only seen figures which were not filtered in that way. They certainly weren't "always" filtered this way because the early figures were specifically criticised for being unfiltered. I remember some slightly later ones which had some laughable filtering on them, but it wasn't filtering for actively-played characters.

One of the videos with the filtered data was cited earlier in this thread. Adam repeatedly detailed in comments for these videos that they were only counting characters that showed signs of being used.