D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics

[Umbran]

This poll wants to let people express regarding the existence of a change in aesthetics AND if the change is in line with their tastes in a more clear way that a debate into the forum.

Polls, in genearl, require the respondant to cram their personal opinion into one of several premade boxes. Responding to a poll generally requires compromising on clarity of your personal position. Polls, at best, get the general gist by being vague, not by being clear.

And don't want to represent the whole D&D gamers world, but the people of this forum.

The poll cannot be expected to be representative of the people of this forum. The respondants are what we'd call a "self-selected sample" - they are people who choose to respond to the poll for a reason. The overwhelming majority of the thousands of our users don't respond, and therefore don't share the reasons - so they are different from those who respond, and those who respond can't be expected to represent the feelings of that majority.

 

[Yaarel]

This poll wants to let people express regarding the existence of a change in aesthetics AND if the change is in line with their tastes in a more clear way that a debate into the forum. And don't want to represent the whole D&D gamers world, but the people of this forum.
Just in case you were in doubt of the intentions.

But that premise is faulty because there is no change in esthetics. Every erroneous example of some change can be shown to have already existed since 1e long ago. There is no change in the kinds of images.

The only "changes" people might agree on is technical: better, cheaper, and more convenient access to color images. There seems to be a more consistent effort to represent a diversity of heroes of various ethnicities and genders. But such diverse images also existed in 1e. Perhaps there are more official nonhuman races, but 1e and 2e already had drow, tiefling, thri-kreen (insect), and so on, and it was common for DMs to allow a player to play a monster from a statblock. There is no qualitative change.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Polls, in genearl, require the respondant to cram their personal opinion into one of several premade boxes. Responding to a poll generally requires compromising on clarity of your personal position. Polls, at best, get the general gist by being vague, not by being clear.



The poll cannot be expected to be representative of the people of this forum. The respondants are what we'd call a "self-selected sample" - they are people who choose to respond to the poll for a reason. The overwhelming majority of the thousands of our users don't respond, and therefore don't share the reasons - so they are different from those who respond, and those who respond can't be expected to represent the feelings of that majority.

The same for all the poll of the forum, even those whose results are ok for you.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

But that premise is faulty because there is no change in esthetics.

LOL, seriuosly? No time to waste sir, really. Hope we can argue on another topic in the future.

 

[Amrûnril]

For sure is not made by a professional.
Can you suggest a better way to arrange statements?

I think the clearest way would be something like:

I approve of the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I am neutral towards the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I disapprove of the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I don't perceive consistent changes to D&D's aesthetics.

This doesn't get around self-selection issues, of course, but it states the options in as neutral a manner as possible, and it avoids complicating the options with overly specific explanatory statements.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

I think the clearest way would be something like:

I approve of the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I am neutral towards the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I disapprove of the changes to D&D's aesthetics.
I don't perceive consistent changes to D&D's aesthetics.

This doesn't get around self-selection issues, of course, but it states the options in as neutral a manner as possible, and it avoids complicating the options with overly specific explanatory statements.

Yes. What would be lost is the information about Official aesthetics VS Personal aesthetics, but it would be definitely bullet proof.

 

[Yaarel]

LOL, seriuosly? No time to waste sir, really. Hope we can argue on another topic in the future.

Well, if you refuse to listen to the people who respond to your poll, it becomes impossible for your polls to ever be accurate ... or meaningful or useful or representative.

 

[Umbran]

The same for all the poll of the forum, even those whose results are ok for you.

Yep. I don't generally use forum poll results to support my positions for that reason.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Well, if you refuse to listen to the people who respond to your poll, it becomes impossible for your polls to ever be accurate ... or meaningful or useful or representative.

Excuse me, but you can't say a poll it's not valid because of a position that is clearly expressed inside the poll itself

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Yep. I don't generally use forum poll results to support my positions for that reason.

Anyway the poll could support even the opposite of my position. Call it luck