Parmandur
Book-Friend, he/him
Sounds a lot like OneD&D talk.
Sounds a lot like OneD&D talk.
citation needed...That's really out how sampling works.
I think they are (kind of) I don't think there is a big "Bring back the warlord" or "Bring back the swordsage" movement... but I am seeing more and more talk on social media (even new players that have never played pre 5e) and at stores about dissatisfaction with caster to non caster abilities.It could be, absolutely. I just don't think WotC is sufficiently motivated to make such a class. Are their shiny new fans demanding a complex martial? If they're not, they won't make one.
Your experience is with the organized play world, sure. Thst doesn't mean that it is representative. I've known tons of people who play, none of whom ever touched convention or in-store play. And even thosewho have, how many are going to pay attention to AL rules in their home game, at any rate...?citation needed...
nelson ratings aren't "Take every person that watches TV" its "Take a sample of each and every type and then interpret"
When we poll for political reasons, we don't need to call all 100% of voters, but a subset.
IMDB uses self selected people to rate movies and so does Rotten tomatoes...
if YOU want to prove that people that play at cons and at AL and at game stores is not representative then YOU have to show what makes the people that play in public different then those that play at home.
Most new Players I have interacted with have NOT been on tic tok or this page or twitter... the ones I have seen to go on to run home games, I met at stores, cons and AL events.
Not every player I know goes to or plays public games (although I did know a couple that had a gaming store so we did try to support them) but I would say about 2 out of the 15 of us did somewhat pre covid (and we are starting to get back to it)
Back during the big schism when some of us went to 4e, and some went to PF and some went to different non D20 games, there was at least 1 from each group that was going to 1+ con a year and at least some playing some form of organized play.
okay so just simply explain what is different. What is it about the sub section of people playing in public that makes it not representative?Your experience is with the organized play world, sure. Thst doesn't mean that it is representative.
okay, so what you JUST said is that the people who DO go to conventions, or in store, or AL... ALSO play in home games. So, in your experience what is the difference?I've known tons of people who play, none of whom ever touched convention or in-store play. And even thosewho have, how many are going to pay attention to AL rules in their home game, at any rate...?
maybe maybe not... none of us know the futureBased on the latest changes to AL (reeeeeaaaallly loosening up), it's likely to be used to beat the "OneD&D" in the future anyways, so I wouldn't be surprised if AL goes out of their way to accommodate mixing to help ease in amybody.
Indeed, but there are a lot of techniques used to build those subsets so that they weed out selection biases as much as they can. And even then we've seen political polls to awry in recent years because of things that we're still learning (the tendency of supporters to avoid polls if they perceive their candidate is getting beat, thus undercounting the support) and changes in the electorate (fewer land lines for telephone polls, etc)citation needed...
nelson ratings aren't "Take every person that watches TV" its "Take a sample of each and every type and then interpret"
When we poll for political reasons, we don't need to call all 100% of voters, but a subset.
IMDB uses self selected people to rate movies and so does Rotten tomatoes...
if YOU want to prove that people that play at cons and at AL and at game stores is not representative then YOU have to show what makes the people that play in public different then those that play at home.
no but I think that without evidence to the contrary I am not willing to call out AL players as against the norm... by the time you get to 2-3 thousand players and they are spread across the country, I think they are a pretty good slice of many different players
okay, but again, you can SHOW what the difference is. It isn't just "These people are abnormal cause I say so"Indeed, but there are a lot of techniques used to build those subsets so that they weed out selection biases as much as they can. And even then we've seen political polls to awry in recent years because of things that we're still learning (the tendency of supporters to avoid polls if they perceive their candidate is getting beat, thus undercounting the support) and changes in the electorate (fewer land lines for telephone polls, etc)
and if you point out "Hey, most of those down votes are X Y Z people little to none of them are type A or type B or type C" then you have an argument... so far the argument is "I don't want to tell you the difference"Welcome to a significant problem with their ratings system. They are subject to things like rating bombings because of that self-selection power of participants.
wait... no that's my argument, that HE is putting the burden of proof on the wrong side.No, that's putting the burden of proof on the wrong side.
except that isn't what happened.. HE IS MAKING THE ASSERTION that they are not in fact representative... he is providing 0 evidence. just "Trust me they don't count"The burden of proof is always on the one making the assertion that the AL group is actually representative of the broader D&D playing community rather than is subject to massive amounts of selection bias.
why is that the presumption (other then cause you say so, or it would hurt your argument if that wasn't true)The presumption is that they really are NOT and thus any generalization derived from them has a higher error value than a good random sample.
that is what I started by saying... so yeah I agree.Sure, they are a slice of different players, but they play the AL way, with all its rules and restrictions beyond what the rulebooks say, because that’s what AL requires.
0, nor did I ever say that. Infact I dare you to find that statement in any post i have made since 2014 when 5e came out... my only argument is you can't use something I said prior to 2014.What evidence do we have that a significant number of them play with AL restrictions at home?
no it isn'tThe argument is whether “what’s allowed in AL” is a good metric for what people will do in D&D at large when it comes to mixing 2014 and 2024 options.