D&D (2024) Class spell lists and pact magic are back!

[Remathilis]

Knowing how WotC conducts their polls, I don’t think it’s ever in one’s interest to vote “dissatisfied” on something they want to see improved. Like I said, I think the practical way to engage with these surveys is to vote “very satisfied” if you want something to remain as-is, “satisfied” if you like it but think it needs improvement, and “very dissatisfied” if you don’t like it and don’t want it, with the “dissatisfied” not really having any utility.

But people do. For example, Treantmonk went through a number of features he was "dissatisfied" with because he felt the changes didn't go far enough. For example, he was dissatisfied with Warrior of the Hands Open Hand Technique not because he doesn't feel Monks shouldn't be doing those kinds of things, but because he feels it shouldn't cost a discipline point and require a saving throw to do what weapon mastery is essentially doing for free. But his "dissatisfied" vote gets lumped in with people who hate monks, feel open hand technique is OP, etc etc. In the end, everybody who did not line up behind it ended up in the same pool regardless of why they were dissatisfied and all that does is give WotC plausible deniability to do nothing since "well, we tried something and it failed".

 

[Chaosmancer]

if you have something useful to contribute, let me know. I see no reason here for why it is not better

As far as I can tell, your complaint is that 70% is too high of a barrier. That additionally, you want them to do iterative testing on all of their ideas. And beyond that, you want some sort of different survey options, mostly it seems in having everyone submit written feedback which will only lower participation overall.

And your main reasoning for this seems to be

1) You cannot possibly believe that by looking at an incredibly common and widely used methodology, backed up by written comments, and taking into account large swathes of DnD online community discussions the team can have any idea what people like.

2) Somehow you don't understand that not meeting a threshold isn't minority tyranny. Because, by your logic, if something only got 69% of the vote, only 1% of all people are holding it back, instead of realizing that... they didn't reach the threshold.

1 is just kind of arrogant I think. Are they getting perfect data? Of course not, no such thing exists. But they have been using this exact same method of surveying for years, and this exact same method of surveying has been used by hundreds of companies and agencies for decades. They know how to read this data.

The second is just... nonsense. Yeah, if they changed the barrier of entry to 60%, more things would get in. Same is true if they changed it to 50%. But even at 50%, according to your logic, if 49% of the people liked it, then 1% is deciding for everyone, instead of realizing that 51% disagreed. Your problem with this whole minority angle is that it is ONLY when you lower the bar to 51% approval that it goes away... and that would be EVEN WORSE than what they are doing now. I don't think ANYTHING in the One DnD playtest scored that low. So, by that point, you'd have reached a stage where the results are nearly useless.

And your suggestions will only act as a barrier to entry, meaning fewer people's voices heard, which will not actually achieve your stated aim.

 

[Charlaquin]

But people do. For example, Treantmonk went through a number of features he was "dissatisfied" with because he felt the changes didn't go far enough. For example, he was dissatisfied with Warrior of the Hands Open Hand Technique not because he doesn't feel Monks shouldn't be doing those kinds of things, but because he feels it shouldn't cost a discipline point and require a saving throw to do what weapon mastery is essentially doing for free. But his "dissatisfied" vote gets lumped in with people who hate monks, feel open hand technique is OP, etc etc. In the end, everybody who did not line up behind it ended up in the same pool regardless of why they were dissatisfied and all that does is give WotC plausible deniability to do nothing since "well, we tried something and it failed".

Right, so… Don’t do that. I agree with you that it’s a dumb methodology, but it is how WotC has been doing it for 10 years, and I don’t see them changing it, especially with how successful 5e ended up being. The most practical thing to do is accept that this is how they’re going to conduct their playtesting, like it or not, and engage with the surveys on those terms. Is it going to feel weird voting “satisfied” for a thing you think needs revision? Probably. But it’s also the most effective action you as an individual can take to try to influence the playtest towards your interests. Along with, of course, using your allotted written comments to express what about the thing you think should change and why.

 

[mamba]

As far as I can tell, your complaint is that 70% is too high of a barrier. That additionally, you want them to do iterative testing on all of their ideas. And beyond that, you want some sort of different survey options, mostly it seems in having everyone submit written feedback which will only lower participation overall.

not really. My main concern is that 1) I cannot properly express what I want to happen, esp. iterate or throw out, and 2) that I have to do so in a way that contradicts plain English.

As was said, if I want an iteration because I think the proposal needs improvements, I need to vote ‘satisfied’, as that is what in the poll should result in an iteration… now I do not know about you, but when I think something needs improvement, I am not satisfied with it, that is pretty much the definition of that word. Dissatisfied’ on the other hand should never be used, it is a trap, not a meaningful choice, in terms of how the poll result will treat it.

That for the poll to work as intended I have to select ‘satisfied’ rather than ‘dissatisfied’ in this case shows how idiotic the design is. It literally violates the rules of the language it is conducted in, bravo

The rest of what you wrote does not in any way reflect what I said. I agree, it is nonsense, as you wrote

 

[MockingBird]

I look at it like this: very dissatisfied = hate it, kill it with holy water. Dissatisfied = I'm not a fan, definitely needs a rework. Satisfied = I like it but could use some work. Very Satisfied = I love it, I want to marry it, don't you dare mess with it.

 

[mamba]

Right, so… Don’t do that. I agree with you that it’s a dumb methodology, but it is how WotC has been doing it for 10 years

thank you, not sure why doing so for 10 years would be a good reason to not fix it though

 

[mamba]

Dissatisfied = I'm not a fan, definitely needs a rework

but will not get one, WotC will throw it out…

 

[tetrasodium]

I look at it like this: very dissatisfied = hate it, kill it with holy water. Dissatisfied = I'm not a fan, definitely needs a rework. Satisfied = I like it but could use some work. Very Satisfied = I love it, I want to marry it, don't you dare mess with it.

There is a reason why political pollsters so often use descriptive terms like that rather than numbers the responder is expected to interpret on their own. It also allows those terms to be changed from question to question so clarity is established

 

[mellored]

So once I homebrew it so that it cant' be countered, silence or disrupted, and requires no V, S or M, why bother having it a spell? Just because the other smites are spells? Because some people find 1+1+1 to be more complex? And yes, I agree that there are reasons they are changing it, but bad reasons are still bad.

Easier if you just ban counterspell.

I mean, if it's this bad for paladins, I can't imagine playing a wizard if your games.

 

[Chaosmancer]

not really. My main concern is that 1) I cannot properly express what I want to happen, esp. iterate or throw out, and 2) that I have to do so in a way that contradicts plain English.

As was said, if I want an iteration because I think the proposal needs improvements, I need to vote ‘satisfied’, as that is what in the poll should result in an iteration… now I do not know about you, but when I think something needs improvement, I am not satisfied with it, that is pretty much the definition of that word. Dissatisfied’ on the other hand should never be used, it is a trap, not a meaningful choice, in terms of how the poll result will treat it.

For me, if I could live with it, it got satisfied, and if I really liked it, it got greatly satisfied.

And, you know, if you said dissatisfied, and enough people said satisfied... you may hit that 60% mark and get it iterated on. Remember, the 70% mark is KEEPING IT AS IS, BUT TWEAKS. 60% is NEEDS WORK.

You can't just assume your own vote, their percentages aren't just "how many people voted this way" the percentage is an average of the votes. So, if you were dissatisfied because you wouldn't want that version in the book, and a bunch of other people were greatly dissatisfied because they hate the idea with a burning passion... you end up with a lower percentage than you dissatisfied and others satisfied and willing to accept that version.

Perhaps you just weight your own opinion too strongly? You have to remember there are literal tens of thousands of people voting. Your single voice isn't swaying things, no matter HOW you vote. It is all trends and averages.