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

[UngeheuerLich]

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?

Where did you get the impression that only 1's and 5's were count? That is a conspiracy theory, not more.
They might as well have a satisfactory facto for each answer (0 for 1 star, 1 for 5 star, which we seem to agree to, and against your believe most probably some factors for 2 to 4...)

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

Again. Where is your source?

 

[Queer Venger]

I tried to follow the 5.24 news, but splitting it up into multiple chunks just lost me.
As far as I can see, low levels are a little bit easier and weapon "features" are fun.

Anything else important that you guys know?

my players and I have been following the playtest and development videos; we are all really excited to switch; my players. particularly. We've been playing 2014 5e now for the full 10 years its been out, it's starting to show its age. We are coinciding the release with starting our new spelljammer campaign.

overall the changes are very welcome (particularly for me as dungeon. master) though I. am still waiting to see what the new MM will deliver (really hoping monsters get a really much needed boost in lethality and CR).

PHB, DMG and MM (and screen) have all been pre-ordered, 2 copies each, one. for DM other for players.

 

[mamba]

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

I am not ruling that out. My problem is that the way the poll is constructed is not good at figuring this out, People fill it out with a different understanding and WotC has no good way of interpreting their answers accurately.

Is 'meh' a 'I like the direction, but this needs improvement' or a 'I do not like this, stick to the short rest'? WotC won't know and since you do not know whether the result is WotC will revise it or throw it out, you cannot afford to vote '3', regardless of which one it was. Hence my conclusion that anything but a 1 or a 5 is at best a waste and at worst achieving the opposite of what you wanted.

Well, not going to change anything now, so no point continuing it, but I am very disappointed in the process.

 

[Parmandur]

Wgere did you get the impression that only 1's and 5's were count? That is a conspiracy theory, not more.
They might as well have a satisfactory facto for each answer (0 for 1 star, 1 for 5 star, which we seem to agree to, and against your believe most probably some factors for 2 to 4...)

Again. Where is your source?

From what I can suss from watching these for the past decade: the main target metric for WotC is the median response. If most people respond with 5/5...that's good, the median (or mean, I'm an Engliah lit major) is 70%. Not enough by itself, because if people give 5/5 and say "I could tolerate this change" that can still not pass muster for them. But if more people give a 1-4 reaponse...which the median/mean result would be under 70...not worth it to WotC to pursue.

 

[Parmandur]

I am not ruling that out. My problem is that the way the poll is constructed is not good at figuring this out, People fill it out with a different understanding and WotC has no good way of interpreting their answers accurately.

Is 'meh' a 'I like the direction, but this needs improvement' or a 'I do not like this, stick to the short rest'? WotC won;t know and since you do not know whether the result is WotC will revise it or throw it out, you cannot afford to vote '3', regardless of which one it was. Hence my conclusion that anything but a 1 or a 5 is at best a waste and at worst achieving the opposite of what you wanted.

Well, not going to change anything now, so no point continuing it, but I am very disappointed in the process.

Yes, a vote of 3 is a vote against that direction, essentially. Filling in the comment field probavly helps some, but anything less than 5 is a sign of undesireability, not "iterate on this".

 

[DEFCON 1]

Yes, a vote of 3 is a vote against that direction, essentially. Filling in the comment field probavly helps some, but anything less than 5 is a sign of undesireability, not "iterate on this".

Which is a valid point for those who wished WotC was more plain about that when they put the surveys out. That there was a requisite "gaming the system" format that people needed to take to supposedly have a better chance of their individual vote having meaning. Although ultimately, no one's vote actually meant anything in and of itself. You would need thousands upon thousands of other people who thought the exact way you did to see your wants and needs actually change the course of this giant cruise ship of a survey system.

So yes... WotC never said that (general) your vote was virtually meaningless. Each person had to figure that out for themselves. And if they did... THEN they might figure out the best way to game the system to hopefully see the ever-slightest chance of a change. But in truth... even if any one person DID vote '5' down the line on their survey just to make sure what they liked had a chance to getting in-- even if they might've despised that particular iteration of how to do it-- there were already hundreds of other people who were doing the exact... same... thing...

...and it STILL didn't help. Because there were tens of thousands of others who genuinely HATED what those people liked.

 

[Parmandur]

Which is a valid point for those who wished WotC was more plain about that when they put the surveys out. That there was a requisite "gaming the system" format that people needed to take to have a better chance of their individual vote having meaning. Because ultimately, no one's vote actually meant anything in and of itself. You would need thousands upon thousands of other people who thought the exact way you did to see your wants and needs actually change the course of this giant cruise ship of a survey system.

So yes... WotC never said that (general) your vote was virtually meaningless. Each person had to figure that out for themselves. And if they did... THEN they might figure out the best way to game the system to hopefully see the ever-slightest chance of a change. But in truth... even if any one person DID vote '5' down the line on their survey just to make sure what they liked had a chance to getting in-- even if they might've despised that particular iteration of how to do it-- there were already hundreds of other people who were doing the exact... same... thing...

...and it STILL didn't help. Because there were tens of thousands of others who genuinely HATED what those people liked.

Well, they are pretty clear it is a temperature test...and have shown again and again a commitment to killing anything that doesn't test well. Hence only 3 new Wizard subclasses after a decade and some very interesting proposals.

 

[mamba]

Yes, a vote of 3 is a vote against that direction, essentially. Filling in the comment field probavly helps some, but anything less than 5 is a sign of undesireability, not "iterate on this".

yes, that is my conclusion, if you want something to survive, definitely vote 5, no matter how flawed the proposed form is. If you want it gone, vote 1. If you do not care, why even fill out the question. So vote 1 or 5 and focus on stuff that matters to you.

I assume this is very different from how most people actually fill out the poll however. I assume most people see 5 as 'great', 4 as 'I am for it, but it could be better', 3 as 'I do not really care either way', and 1 and 2 are 'I do not like this' to varying degrees.

I expect most votes of 4 to mean 'I like it, but I want improvements', and yet you have it as 'a vote of undesirability'. You are probably correct that it gets interpreted that way by WotC given the results, but I don't think most people understand that and vote that way, and that is my problem with the approach.

 

[mellored]

Apparently not enough people figured that out.

Or, most people really didn't want warlocks to be a half caster.

I certainly down voted it, writing in the desire for more variations of classes. (I also wanted sorcerers to cast directly with Sorcery Points).

 

[DEFCON 1]

I expect most votes of 4 to mean 'I like it, but I want improvements', and yet you have it as 'a vote of undesirability'. You are probably correct that it gets interpreted that way by WotC given the results, but I don't think most people understand that and vote that way, and that is my problem with the approach.

Well, not necessarily. If everyone voted '4', then that would have been 80% preferred and thus it would have most likely been iterated on.

But you couple a whole bunch of '4's with massive amounts of '3's, '2's, and '1's... you drop that 80% down to below 70% and and that says "ambivalent" down to "actively disliked."