D&D 5E New D&D Survey, with some in-depth setting questions

[Yaarel]

That might be how you use the terminology, but it certainly isn't how WotC does. Lineages are things you can be born as or become, races are just things you're born as.

Lineage = Mutation, Race = Species

Van Richtens and the Wild Beyond the Witchlight both prove that.

The UA Gothic Lineages (that mentions Hexblood, etcetera) explains how the designers use the terms lineage, race, npc, and monster.

Lineage ≠ mutation

Lineage = species

Lineage = PC race + NPC monster

Both player race and nonplayer monster can belong to the same lineage.

Richtens, Witchlight, and Fizbans confirm that.

 

[Hussar]

I did

I have to admit. After the kerfuffle in that thread, I would LOVE to see how the results of race fall out. Either way. Either I was completely wrong and halflings are more popular than I think, or, I was on the money and halflings are a vestigial also ran race that are only included because of tradition.

One can dream...

 

[Parmandur]

I think they meant to write High Magic instead of low…

I think so, though Baker prefers to define it as "low but wide" magic.

 

[Yaarel]

I think they meant to write High Magic instead of low…

I think they meant "low magic", in the sense of ubiquitous cantrip-like and ritual-like magic in Eberron.

 

[Yaarel]

By the way, I was 98% when the survey asked my gender and ethnicity. So it is probably the last question.

 

[Scribe]

I have to admit. After the kerfuffle in that thread, I would LOVE to see how the results of race fall out. Either way. Either I was completely wrong and halflings are more popular than I think, or, I was on the money and halflings are a vestigial also ran race that are only included because of tradition.

One can dream...

Make a poll, up to three choices like the Wizards question.

 

[Yaarel]

I have to say, three choices was too few.

I wanted five each time I was limited to three.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think they meant "low magic", in the sense of ubiquitous cantrip-like and ritual-like magic in Eberron.

Ubiquitous magic of any kind seems like the opposite of low magic to me.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think so, though Baker prefers to define it as "low but wide" magic.

Huh. What does that mean, I’ve never heard of wide magic before.

 

[AtomicPope]

They are poisoning 5e data with data from other editions that had different options. They are already tailoring questions based on previous answers, they could have asked the right questions, or even skipped over that question if what they actually wanted was 5e data. But instead, if they are doing as you say they are, they have what they think is 5e data that is skewed by players of different editions. And is therefore wrong.

Are we sure that's what's happening?

The survey is about D&D, not just 5e. When we're not limited to a single edition of D&D we have to cover a lot of ground. Not to mention, they want to know who is playing, when they started, and what they like. For people like me, I love Greyhawk, Spelljammer, and Darksun. None of that is getting full treatment in 5e. It would make sense to ask me questions about Basic Edition or some earlier edition to get an understanding why I like those out of print settings.

Of course, WotC is selling 5e. So they're gathering information to sell us more 5e products. I'm OK with that.