D&D (2024) What is your oppinion of 5.24 so far?

[FrogReaver]

While the accuracy of survey data is certainly disputable, I still believe it's a far better view of DnD players in aggregate than anything here or previously attempted. I grow tired of aspersions and conspiracy theories leveled at the designers when they make decisions people disagree with.

I counter that Most d&d players are very casual. Definitely not like here on enworld, but also not really the kind that’s going to spend an hour each survey responding and also not the kind that’s going to go out of their way to playtest.

In some sense the long surveys and playtests really tell us what the most diehard d&d fans want.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

If (general) you were a person who loved the idea of a half-caster warlock (or templated wildshapes as another example) but still gave them 1s and 2s because what WotC offered up wasn't 100% the way you'd prefer them to be... (general) you pretty much shot off your own foot.

You're making up a guy to get mad at.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, I'm blaming the players who filled out the surveys if they downvoted the half-caster warlock because they just didn't like this particular version of it. Those people apparently never learned or understood how these surveys worked for WotC, and/or were unwilling to "play the game" as it were. Especially if they also didn't fill out the write-in fields saying they liked the idea but wanted to see iteration before giving a full thumbs-up.

If (general) you were a person who loved the idea of a half-caster warlock (or templated wildshapes as another example) but still gave them 1s and 2s because what WotC offered up wasn't 100% the way you'd prefer them to be... (general) you pretty much shot off your own foot. The lesson was to give the new idea a 5-point double-thumbs-up first... then write in the fields some of the changes that you thought the idea could do with to be even better.

Apparently not enough people figured that out.

Honestly, I think the most likely explanation is that more people prefer the 2014 Pact Magic with Short Rests.

WotC's goal of 70% means that their minimum is a median response of 5/5 on their scale: so if the final version hit that, that means moat people like it.

 

[mamba]

While the accuracy of survey data is certainly disputable, I still believe it's a far better view of DnD players in aggregate than anything here or previously attempted. I grow tired of aspersions and conspiracy theories leveled at the designers when they make decisions people disagree with.

this has nothing to do with whether I disagree with the decisions or not. Yes, it is the best collection of data to date, and yes, it still has a lot of room for improvement, the two are not mutually exclusive

 

[Gorck]

My 2 cents is try it out first before house ruling

Oh, yeah, definitely. No sense in fixing something that might not be broken. But if it does wind up needing to be houseruled, at least I’ll have a foundation to start from.

 

[DEFCON 1]

That would have been a wonderful thing not to mislead your customers about, or, if you're being charitable, being more clear about how to actually communicate opinion to these people.

I mean sure... but I'll be honest, I have serious doubts that the number of respondents who actually wanted half-caster warlocks but who actually voted 1s and 2s because they didn't like that specific iteration to be exceedingly small. I suspect a good number of them were probably doing 3s and 4s like they would any other thing that they had mixed feelings about. But you couple those 3s and 4s with the 1s and 2s from all the players who actually didn't like half-caster warlocks... all of them combined brought the numbers down low enough to not make it worth bothering to salvage.

I know the people who loved things that didn't end up moving forward (half-caster warlocks, template wildshapes, spell "power sources") desperately want to believe that their views were actually part of the "popular side" but that the naughty, bad, tricksy, evil WotC had already made up their mind to kill them (which of course makes no sense, because if that was true they wouldn't have even offered them up to people to vote on in the first place)... but let's just face the more likely truth:

They were just in the minority. Most people did not like the new options enough to warrant changing them-- oftentimes just for the sake of change-- because the new thing was not any appreciatively better.

Did I have an issue or problem with spell power sources? Nope. If enough people loved the idea and it went forward, that would have been fine with me. I didn't really care. But I also can state plainly that when they first appeared in the UA my first thought was "What's the point of this? It's not any better than what we have, so why bother?" And I would venture a guess to say I was not alone in that thought, and the numbers seemed to bear it out.

 

[DEFCON 1]

You're making up a guy to get mad at.

Heh... you don't think there was anyone out there who thought that? Okay. That's cool. If you have another explanation you'd rather go with for yourself, go nuts! Doesn't matter to me either way.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Honestly, I think the most likely explanation is that more people prefer the 2014 Pact Magic with Short Rests.

WotC's goal of 70% means that their minimum is a median response of 5/5 on their scale: so if the final version hit that, that means moat people like it.

Believe me, I'm right there with you. I also believe the most likely answer is merely that changing pact magic to half-caster status was just ambivalent towards or actively disliked by most people.

But I'm also willing to throw those posters here a bone who think "Oh no, it really WAS popular, WotC just can't write a good survey!" by saying "Yeah, well, if enough people just couldn't figure out how to respond to the survey to the get the result they wanted... then sure. It was their survey response that was the problem."

I don't think it's true... but I'm willing to go along with the idea if it makes some people feel better about their situation.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That would have been a wonderful thing not to mislead your customers about, or, if you're being charitable, being more clear about how to actually communicate opinion to these people.

They did. People decided not to read or listen.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They did. People decided not to read or listen.

Do they state anywhere that they don't care about any ratings that aren't ones and fives, and they assume you live or hate everything about a question unless you add a detailed written note?

Five point scales are meaningless if you ignore 2-4.