Mod Note:
As noted, the comment you’re responding to is an old phrase; your response seems a tad pointed. Do better going forward.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D (2024) GenCon 2023 - D&D Rules Revision panel
- Thread starter Veltharis ap Rylix
- Start date
As noted, the comment you’re responding to is an old phrase; your response seems a tad pointed. Do better going forward.
mamba
Legend
maybe you would get a more passionate response with better templates…
If this is not just a matter of a 70% threshold but now you mix in passion too, the playtest is entirely theatre and WotC can just do whatever and justify it by the results.
The only thing stopping them is that they want a product that sells (ie avoid a 4e scenario), but the whole process becomes just one black box with lots of random elements
mamba
Legend
unreliable data for things they would not have added in this form anyway, great… not all data is valuable
FrogReaver
The most respectful and polite poster ever
How long were the d&d next playtests?
How long were the d&d one playtests?
How long were the d&d one playtests?
Shardstone
Hero
I just don't get people's acceptance of the status quo.
I get acceptance that what we get is what we get. I will accept whatever form of D&D WotC puts out, because I have little, if any, influence over that. But that doesn't mean we can't be constantly aspiring too better solutions to problems, already solved or not. Its seems antiethical to any artist, let alone game designer, to constantly just settle. There's a certain amount of settling that has to be done by a corporation, but that doesn't mean we can't keep asking for them to push harder. Innovation is how we got from B/X to the 5E of today — not just accepting things as they are, but by pushing to see what else we can do, how else can we crack this nut.
I get acceptance that what we get is what we get. I will accept whatever form of D&D WotC puts out, because I have little, if any, influence over that. But that doesn't mean we can't be constantly aspiring too better solutions to problems, already solved or not. Its seems antiethical to any artist, let alone game designer, to constantly just settle. There's a certain amount of settling that has to be done by a corporation, but that doesn't mean we can't keep asking for them to push harder. Innovation is how we got from B/X to the 5E of today — not just accepting things as they are, but by pushing to see what else we can do, how else can we crack this nut.
Parmandur
Book-Friend, he/him
I mean, they don't owe anyone outside of WotC the data...that's proprietary.
Parmandur
Book-Friend, he/him
Just because the data doesn't give the result one may wish, doesn't mean that it is bad data.
Data is the big advantage WotC has in the marketplace.
Incenjucar
Legend
There's only so much energy people have to spend on yelling at a corporation. I imagine most people with strong opinions and energy end up working on projects or looking into other games.
mamba
Legend
no they do not, I did not say they do
mamba
Legend
that was not the point I am making, to me it is an objectively bad way to gather data, regardless of the outcome. I have been consistently distinguishing between these two. Bad methodology can lead to outcomes I like, a good one can lead to outcomes I do not like, that changes nothing about the quality of the methodology
That I think it got in the way of things I would have preferred is just the icing on the cake, and probably a reason why I took a closer look at it, but it does not inform my judgement of the methodology, I always gave reasons for why it is / examples for why I think it is. Argue those if you want to. If anyone is arguing from the outcome to the methodology it is you when you say ‘D&D is selling great, so how they test must be working’
Last edited:
