D&D 5E (2024) A critical analysis of 2024's revised classes

[Zardnaar]

All the UA stuff is only on beyond now?

 

[DEFCON 1]

To me the survey is useless for improving the game, what it does is identify the real duds that no one likes, and that probably is all WotC cares about anyway

I've believed this is what the surveys have always been... just seeing which new ideas at a basic form are intriguing to players. Basic opinions on what a lot of people like or don't like about potential ideas. But that's it. It has NEVER had anything to do with asking the playerbase to try and improve the game... because quite frankly I don't believe ANY of us could improve this game with our ideas in any meaningful way to the pleasure of almost everyone. I've seen what a lot of you here on EN World think is so "massively important" to making Dungeons & Dragons "good", and my response is quite often "Are you kidding me? That would freaking suck!" So I'm sorry... a large amount of what each of us think would "improve" the game... would not in any way, shape, or form actually do so-- other than making it better for us personally. And WotC knows this better than anyone.

These playtests are merely about just throwing us in the playerbase a bone to get some of our opinions on some new ideas. Some new ideas we have liked-- Ad/Disad... Weapon Masteries... Cunning Action. Other ideas we haven't-- Spell lists by power source... Wild Shape templates... the Warlock as a half-caster. And for any of those incredibly basic ideas, does it matter if the surveys were "representative" of the entire playerbase? No. Not in the least. Why? Because most of the players doesn't give a crap. It's a game. They see the rules, they use the rules. End of story.

It's only us idiots who demand the rules fit our personal beliefs of what a "good game" is that give a crap with how these playtests and surveys run. And when we find that our personal beliefs of what is a "good game" or "good rule" gets shot down by a bunch of other people... that's when we get all bent out of shape and turn up our noses and insult the WotC machine for being stupid or biased or lazy.

When actually the truth is even simpler... we just all have bad taste when it comes to the design of a game meant to try and please millions of people all at once.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

All the UA stuff is only on beyond now?

I think you at least need a free level account to download the pdfs. I think it’s technically possible to fill in the survey without an account though.

 

[TwoSix]

And I'm deeply suspicious of any appeal to some kind of intractable and dedicated pro-wizard "partisans" who just always want the wizard to be better than everything else.

That sounds like what the people working for the wizards WANTS you to think.

 

[mamba]

I've believed this is what the surveys have always been... just seeing which new ideas at a basic form are intriguing to players. Basic opinions on what a lot of people like or don't like about potential ideas. But that's it. It has NEVER had anything to do with asking the playerbase to try and improve the game... because quite frankly I don't believe ANY of us could improve this game with our ideas in any meaningful way to the pleasure of almost everyone

maybe, but then why did they apparently change the format since, making it easier to distinguish between ‘I do not like the idea’ and ‘I like it, but it is not there yet’

In any case, a test that just checks vibes is not worth my time. It hardly is if it actually tried to identify improvements, given that I am one in tens of thousands of voices.

As to the playerbase not being able to please everyone, for one neither is WotC, and for another that is why they collect input and act on it rather than having us design the game

 

[Seramus]

The more time required to complete the survey, the more you select in favour of very hardcore players.

I'm talking about how long the survey is open to responses. The window is so small, the majority of people are barely getting a single game in to playtest. Maaaybe two.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

that is my problem with them, what does giving something a 2 mean? Do I not like it and want to keep what we have now, do I like the idea but think the implementation needs work? Will WotC understand it the same way I meant it?

After a few rounds I settled on only voting min (reject it outright) or max (like the direction, nothing else matters) values, as that is the only way for WotC to not get it wrong.

After the halfway point where they threw out every single thing that was halfway interesting, I no longer bothered taking a look.

To me the survey is useless for improving the game, what it does is identify the real duds that no one likes, and that probably is all WotC cares about anyway

It turns out, analyzing a complex, multifaceted thing by simplifying it down to a number 1-10 isn't really the best survey design. They've been using this survey design, or others extremely similar to it, since 2012.

If you don't trust the methods they're using right now, and think those methods are liable to produce more harm than good, what does that say? If the method hasn't changed in a decade and a half, and the only thing it does is sometimes cut out "the real duds", while sometimes leaving good work on the cutting room floor (e.g. playtest Sorcerer) or leaving in execrable crap (e.g. the 5.0 Berserker), what should we conclude?

This is why I've said, for years and years, that the thing WotC needs is someone on staff, or at least a consultant, who is actually trained in statistics, and someone else who is on staff (or a consultant), who is actually trained in survey design and analysis.

Because when you build a product based on statistical, mathematical rules, and "test" those rules by collecting survey data, I would say it is kind of important to have at least one person who actually knows how to do each of those things at a professional level.

I'm talking about how long the survey is open to responses. The window is so small, the majority of people are barely getting a single game in to playtest. Maaaybe two.

Oh, the duration doesn't help, to be sure. But you could collect data for a full year and still not get anything meaningful out of it if the survey itself is designed badly--whereas a well-designed survey, even if it is over a limited range, still has a good chance of giving you something useful, even if it's imperfect. No survey will ever be perfect, but they could be a damn sight better than they are.

 

[mamba]

They've been using this survey design, or others extremely similar to it, since 2012.

If you don't trust the methods they're using right now, and think those methods are liable to produce more harm than good, what does that say?

what them using this survey design for so long means to me is that they simply do not care about having a survey that actually works at identifying what their customers consider an improvement.

They are perfectly happy with seeing it as a purely marketing / engagement tool with the added bonus of sometimes preventing the worst offenders from making it into a book.

It also tells me that I am wasting my time even looking at their surveys.

 

[ECMO3]

you are using different words here. Different classes of people respond to the survey at different rates than is in the population. Even you didnt dispute this. That makes it by definition a non-representative sample.

But it does not mean or indicate that it skews the results. It does not provide evidence the survey results would be different with a different sample, especially when both groups of people would have the same goals in broad terms (improving the game).

Your hypothesis rests on the idea that "dedicated" players want different things than "casual" players and there is no evidence of that.

 

[Zardnaar]

what them using this survey design for so long means to me is that they simply do not care about having a survey that actually works at identifying what their customers consider an improvement.

They are perfectly happy with seeing it as a purely marketing / engagement tool with the added bonus of sometimes preventing the worst offenders from making it into a book.

It also tells me that I am wasting my time even looking at their surveys.

I stopped responding a decade ago lol.