Did the internet change your mind?

[Gorgoroth]

Remember kids: when you fill out the online surveys, you are not "voting" for your favorite game mechanics. I doubt very seriously if Wizards of the Coast is keeping track of the number of people who do/do not like Vancian magic, for example. They are most interested in whether or not we had fun playing the game. So campaigning for (or against) a particular element isn't going to get you the results you want.

I disagree, from what I've read they are very receptive to the wishes of the majority. They'd be foolish not to, if they completely ignore us on the one extreme, they'll fail miserably, but if they bow down to every idea or flame war on the other, D&D Next would probably also fail. A happy medium, with some fresh ideas and a good synthesis of all the good stuff from various editions, could come together nicely.

My opinions on various topics has changed over the years, sometimes back and forth...a cogent argument from any perspective has a better chance at swaying me, as I appreciate a well-reasoned argument over just foot-stomping or tantrums (though I've been known to get way over-zealous about "trivial" things like game rules...but that's what a "fan" is, a fanatic).

Getting real metrics, even in the imperfect form of a poll, can help guide them, or even provide surprising results that you didn't know about your fellow gamers' stances on certain issues. Then when they make certain decisions and a vocal minority bitches about it, they can point to the poll and say "it's what the masses want, suck it". That's if it's an overwhelming majority in one direction vs another.

Like, for example, surges needed to die a horrible death. Light armor wearers need to have much lower AC than heavy armor wearers. Martial dailies and "powers" in general needed to be removed from Core. Etc.

 

[Iron Sky]

Internets flavored my opinion before I played - when I actually played, it didn't have much effect except for some ideas on how to run the Caves better and/or possible house-rules to try.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I think there are a lot of emotions that get moved and influenced by what other people have said. I'm not so sure there are a lot of thoughts that get moved or influenced. Of course, it's really hard to say, sometimes even in person, what is driven by emotion versus what is driven by thought. Even harder online. But I do think that once someone has made up their mind, random posting on the internet is unlikely to change it much.

In any case, the effect noted is less likely to be a problem that other related effects. Say you are thinking X, but it's still rather nebulous. If someone comes along and provides more insight into X, perhaps in a way you had not considered yet, and it sounds good--you are probably going to integrate that into your thoughts eventually anyway. Heck, you might have thought of it yourself next week.

So in this case, the open playtest isn't so much as guiding your choice as speeding up what you will eventually come to think anyway. How many times have you thought X.1, and then much later, after something was done, realized version X.4--and then thought, "I wish someone had told me that earlier."

Where it can get to be a problem is when someone says Y in a non-intuitive way, or you aren't ready for that yet, or you just don't like the guy or how he said it. Then people start reacting to that (i.e. emotion) instead of the thoughts--and someone may very well reject Y out of hand, without really considering it. And of course, there is only so much you can do here, because what can set people off is sometimes as simple as difference in mannerisms.

I've found that the hardest thing to consider fairly is something that you were ready to do/think/agree anyway ... and then that something is supported by a person with an attitude you really don't like. You were on your way into the store to get a sandwich when some obnoxious jerk yelled in your face, "Go buy a sandwich!" It's easy to want to spite that guy. I've tried to take that attitude that obnoxious dude has zero control over me. I'll go buy my sandwich just like I planned, even if obnoxious guy thinks he pushed me around. This is difficult to do, and must be a conscious decision.

I bet everyone a bucket of bits that they get more "bias" in the playtest results from that last effect than people having their minds changed by arguments on the internet.

 

[LostSoul]

Also, I wonder if anyone has played the playtest, thought one thing or another about it from experience, and then come here or gone elsewhere and had their mind changed due to something they read.

Yeah. I posted about my experience and had a few people say that I shouldn't have house-ruled certain aspects of the game. (I didn't consider them house-rules.) I went with some of their recommendations in the next game.

edit: Hmm, maybe that wasn't what you were getting at. Oh well.

 

[the Jester]

The Internet has changed my opinion on political matters more than it has on the 5e playtest.

 

[FireLance]

I've found that the hardest thing to consider fairly is something that you were ready to do/think/agree anyway ... and then that something is supported by a person with an attitude you really don't like. You were on your way into the store to get a sandwich when some obnoxious jerk yelled in your face, "Go buy a sandwich!" It's easy to want to spite that guy. I've tried to take that attitude that obnoxious dude has zero control over me. I'll go buy my sandwich just like I planned, even if obnoxious guy thinks he pushed me around. This is difficult to do, and must be a conscious decision.

This is the main reason why I am very happy that certain posters disagree with me. And it may be observational bias, but I tend to find that those who agree with me are usually intelligent, polite and reasonable.

 

[mkill]

Groupthink is a fact. Just pick any RPG topic and compare what people in different forums write about it. Sometimes, you can even tell when someone who hangs out a lot in forum A goes to forum B - he'll bring opinions, speech patterns, behaviors with him. For example, sometimes you see people ask to "PEACH" their PCs, and you know you have someone who used to hang out at the WotC charop boards. Or take PF board regulars who go somewhere else and suddenly have to deal with people who don't think it's the savior of the RPG industry. And let's not even mention groupthink on therpgsite.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The internet has had a massive impact on the way I think about roleplaying games. And that's just what I'm consciously aware of, there's probably a far greater unconscious influence. Humans are weak, silly creatures who are seldom rational. We know this from psychology.

You Are Not So Smart

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Knowing a bit about both statistics and group communication, I think the statement from the interview is perfectly valid and regarded as a fundamental fact by experts in those fields.

Agreed. I'm not a marketing specialist, but based on the many marketing classes I took in my MBA program and my own experiences I totally agree with Monte.

There's a lot of benefit to discussion too, so I would probably just say "Please play your test games and provide feedback before discussing this with others"

 

[Hussar]

Regardless though, what choice did WOTC have? If they went with a closed playtest, the hue and cry from certain quarters about how another company did an open playtest and had fantastic success and this would now doom 5e blah blah blah would be freakingly near never ending.