D&D 5E New Feats Survey!

[bedir than]

ASIs are too rare to skip raising an ability score for a feat that seems cool but winds up being only occasionally useful, if that. This is especially a trap for less-experienced players.

I've never taken an ASI. It's not that I don't have experience, I just find ASIs boring. They tell very little story.

Getting ~3% better at something isn't as interesting as doing new things.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The feats that relate to skills should just be things you can try. Inspiring Leader should be available anyone with Performance proficiency. (otherwise the feats are subtractive, which I really don't like in 5e).

No, they aren’t, though. Some people make the leap to assume they are, but there is no actual implication that you can’t make a persuasion or performance check to make a rousing speech for your allies, and the feat simply provides a template for what sort of benefit that might have.

 

[Scott Christian]

They want to know if they're attracting female players and young people. These are lucrative, untapped markets.

How do they know this via survey? There are so many variables attached. Is there really a statistical proof that can accommodate for: who is more likely to fill out the survey? Who might lie about their age or gender on the survey? Who the survey's exposed to?

If what you say is true, then that implies they would just throw all the other surveyors' responses away.

 

[Parmandur]

I've never taken an ASI. It's not that I don't have experience, I just find ASIs boring. They tell very little story.

Getting ~3% better at something isn't as interesting as doing new things.

Usually more effective though (and it's5%, pretty significant on the aggregate.

 

[Jer]

I am always a bit curious about the surveys that feel they must know your gender and age. I understand wanting to segregate data, but what is it actually used for? Once it's separated, how is it used after that?

Analysis of trends among those cohorts. Trends among different age cohorts would be suggestive - like if all of the older people are complaining about something and the younger folks love it that's meaningful, as is the reverse. Likewise similar disparities in responses based on gender would also be an interesting fact for market research.

And if there's no significant difference in responses across those cohorts that's also an interesting result, because it's telling you that your player base is more homogeneous despite age and gender differences than you might expect.

 

[Parmandur]

Totally agree, on taking the surveys. I was mainly discounting the relativeness of topics here that generate a lot of noise.

Indeed: for example, Crawford dropped on Twitter a while back that most people playing do not use Feats, and a lot of people on here were pretty resistant to the knthat Feats are a variant rule that isn't normally in play when 5E is played.

 

[Parmandur]

I am always a bit curious about the surveys that feel they must know your gender and age. I understand wanting to segregate data, but what is it actually used for? Once it's separated, how is it used after that?

Normally, they don't give us that much detail about how they parse the results, but the one example I can recall was when they did a UA dor Prestoge Classes, and their results found that people didn't generally like the idea, but people had played 3E really hated the idea in particular...so Prestige Classes weren't ever reintroduced, because the nostalgia target demographic didn't like them.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I've never taken an ASI. It's not that I don't have experience, I just find ASIs boring. They tell very little story.

Getting ~3% better at something isn't as interesting as doing new things.

100% this.

I can only imagine taking an ASI at high level, when I’ve taken all the feats that make sense for my PC.

 

[Parmandur]

100% this.

I can only imagine taking an ASI at high level, when I’ve taken all the feats that make sense for my PC.

Getting 5% better at everything your Class does is pretty attractive at lower Levels. It would take a few ASIs for the calculus to favor Feats, and we just never get thst high in level. And even then, getting 5% at weaknesses is attractive.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Indeed: for example, Crawford dropped on Twitter a while back that most people playing do not use Feats, and a lot of people on here were pretty resistant to the knthat Feats are a variant rule that isn't normally in play when 5E is played.

That is interesting, did he give a value as to most? I am interested because I like feats and would like more of them. I would be happy to see ASI's dropped and replaced entirely by feats.