D&D (2024) The WotC Playtest Surveys Have A Flaw

[Ondath]

I don't think that us forumites are representing of DMs, even. The pages active community for discussing 5E is the Dndnext Subreddit, and that is a small fraction compared to the number of people playing the game...in fact, that Subreddit is a fraction of the number of people actively engaged with this playtest! And EnWorld is way, way less representative than that, even.

I actually think the subreddit is even less representative. If you look over there, it looks like anyone who doesn't want a detailed power-based martial class and nerfing wizards to hell at the same time is a heretic. I've never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity, and while I agree the issue exists, they blow it well out of proportion.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I actually think the subreddit is even less representative. If you look over there, it looks like anyone who doesn't want a detailed power-based martial class and nerfing wizards to hell at the same time is a heretic. I've never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity, and while I agree the issue exists, they blow it well out of proportion.

I don't think the subreddit is less representative.

It has a vastly larger population, and they skew a lot younger.

Also, the way you're portraying is not accurate. It's just what's going on there right now, it hasn't always been that way. Reddit's voting system means issues blow up like solar flares then gradually quiet back down. For example, a few years back, the dominant "extreme opinion" on the subreddit was "Rolling stats suck and you should be ashamed to roll stats" (some people made some kinda-good arguments that way too even if I was arguing against that extreme of an opinion).

And if you're saying you've "never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity" then either you're being forgetful, or you weren't on ENWorld back in late 3.5E, because bloody hell mate, what's happening on the subreddit is absolutely nothing compared to that. There was a point when LFQW was probably one of the top phrases used on ENWorld, when it was in practically every thread.

So yeah, they're not less representative, they're more representative. But they're still not necessarily very representative.

 

[Parmandur]

I actually think the subreddit is even less representative. If you look over there, it looks like anyone who doesn't want a detailed power-based martial class and nerfing wizards to hell at the same time is a heretic. I've never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity, and while I agree the issue exists, they blow it well out of proportion.

I meant merely by numbers.

 

[Ondath]

I don't think the subreddit is less representative.

It has a vastly larger population, and they skew a lot younger.

Also, the way you're portraying is not accurate. It's just what's going on there right now, it hasn't always been that way. Reddit's voting system means issues blow up like solar flares then gradually quiet back down. For example, a few years back, the dominant "extreme opinion" on the subreddit was "Rolling stats suck and you should be ashamed to roll stats" (some people made some kinda-good arguments that way too even if I was arguing against that extreme of an opinion).

And if you're saying you've "never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity" then either you're being forgetful, or you weren't on ENWorld back in late 3.5E, because bloody hell mate, what's happening on the subreddit is absolutely nothing compared to that. There was a point when LFQW was probably one of the top phrases used on ENWorld, when it was in practically everything.

So yeah, they're not less representative, they're more representative. But they're still not necessarily very representative.

Well, that's fair. I was a frequent poster in the earlier years of 5E (I even made a small "hit effect descriptions by damage table" that was popular for a while back in the day), but from around TCE onwards, I felt like the sub's priorities (or at least what got upvoted frequently) no longer aligned with my tastes. First a lot of people using TCE's half-baked rules to dogwhistle reactionary views, then "5E should've been 4E and all of you are idiots for disliking it" crowd, then the current "we must buff martials and decimate casters" group...

And oh god, I just remembered all the passive aggressive PSA posts. I'm lucky I migrated to ENWorld.

 

[mamba]

I actually think the subreddit is even less representative. If you look over there, it looks like anyone who doesn't want a detailed power-based martial class and nerfing wizards to hell at the same time is a heretic. I've never ever seen a more fervent community about the caster/martial disparity, and while I agree the issue exists, they blow it well out of proportion.

that does not appear to have any effect though....

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And oh god, I just remembered all the passive aggressive PSA posts.

Oh that's a general Reddit feature. Good luck finding an active subreddit which doesn't feature passive-aggressive "PSAs" lol. Best case they're an idiot farming upvotes. More often they're someone trying to push some dubious idea they've come up with as normal.

Looking at the DND Next reddit, I have to say, there are literally no threads about the martial/caster issue on the front page right now, so I think that little storm might be over.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Another flaw with all the surveys - WotC has no methodology to differentiate a low or mid vote meaning:

A) No, I hate this, never, throw it away

or

B) I definitely don't want this version, but keep trying

You can write that in, but there's no proximity to the votes in most cases, and again, WotC ain't "reading" 40k surveys in any way that matters (a tiny select sample of more numerically interesting ones, perhaps).

 

[Ondath]

Another flaw with all the surveys - WotC has no methodology to differentiate a low or mid vote meaning:

A) No, I hate this, never, throw it away

or

B) I definitely don't want this version, but keep trying

You can write that in, but there's no proximity to the votes in most cases, and again, WotC ain't "reading" 40k surveys in any way that matters (a tiny select sample of more numerically interesting ones, perhaps).

Absolutely. I think so many of the interesting but weirdly-implemented UA options (the psionic die, stone sorcerer, prestige classes etc.) could actually be great additions, but were scrapped since they took the negative votes to mean nobody wants these ideas to be ever implemented.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Absolutely. I think so many of the interesting but weirdly-implemented UA options (the psionic die, stone sorcerer, prestige classes etc.) could actually be great additions, but were scrapped since they took the negative votes to mean nobody wants these ideas to be ever implemented.

And a lot of it could just have been solved by asking an extra question like "Do you hate this [class/spell/concept/approach] or do you like it but feel we're not in the right place yet?" (but better worded, I'm an idiot who can't write English) with features they had some idea might be controversial.

But they never asked any questions like that, as I recall. It was always just rate this rate this rate this rate this rate this. Often you had to rate such ridiculously inconsequential features it was hard to have an opinion about too.

 

[Shiroiken]

Right, they cant satisfy everyone, not even close.

The problem is that while its a noble goal to get it to be enjoyable by the most people possible, there are many many cases where its not a situation of compromise.

While it hasn't be explicitly stated (to my knowledge, anyway), we can assume the same primary design goal from the Next playtest is in effect for the 1D&D playtest: design to appeal to the broadest possible player base. The solution to these irreconcilable differences boil down to two categories: how many people are in each camp and how many are willing to put up with it.

The Next playtest had several of these conflicts, most notably "damage on a miss." Eventually they determined that the people who liked it were more willing to accept its absence than people who didn't were willing to accept its presence.
Unless the people who liked "damage on a miss" massively outweighed those who didn't, it made more sense to remove it. Since this wasn't the case, abilities like "Slayer" from the early playtest were dropped.