Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (A5E)
Survey Results #1: Broad Outlines
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 8065008" data-attributes="member: 1"><p>We received thousands of votes on our first survey, which addressed the broader outlines of <em>Level Up</em>. Thank you to everybody who participated! From the start this has been planned as a data-driven process. These results — amongst other things — help guide us as we design the game. Some folks have asked why we’ve announced this project so long before its release; it’s so that we can get data at each stage in the process, and recruit great talent for our design team (more on that later!)</p><p></p><p>Anyhow, on to the survey results! Note that these questions were intentionally broad; each of these topics can be drilled into in more detail at a later stage.</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong>These things were very important to you</strong></span></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">100% compatibility with existing 5E material</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Meaningful character choices at each advancement level</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A fully fleshed out Exploration Pillar</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A range of martial maneuvers to give non-spellcasters more options in combat</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">More ways to spend gold at higher levels</li> </ul><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong>You were positive about</strong></span></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A crafting system for magic items</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mechanically distinctive weapons and armor</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Culture and species being separated during character creation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Both a warlord class and a revised spell-less ranger</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A more detailed skill system</li> </ul><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong>You are ambivalent about</strong></span></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A setting toggle between cinematic and gritty modes</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">An overhaul of multiclassing</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Kingdom or domain management, strongholds, and followers</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Gaining ‘species’ features are your character advances</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">More core classes</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A more tactical combat system</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A full psionics system in the core rules</li> </ul><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong>You do not want</strong></span></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Social combat mechanically represented</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">More core species</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A piecemeal species-building method of character creation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A new initiative system</li> </ul><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><strong>And you are polarized on</strong></span></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Prestige classes</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">An Immortal tier for levels 20-30</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Removing alignment</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">More granularity to ability checks that advantage/disadvantage</li> </ul><p>The difference between the third (ambivalent) and last (polarized) categories is interesting. While both resulted in similar average scores, the deviation was very different. In the ambivalent category, votes were clustered around the middle of the scale, indicating no strong feelings either way. In the polarized category, votes were clustered at each end of the scale, indicating that there are two distinct, but strong-feeling camps on those topics.</p><p></p><p>The results came out mainly as we thought they would, with a couple of exceptions — we thought psionics and domain management would score higher. The latter covered a couple of different concepts, though (kingdoms, domains, strongholds, followers) so we will likely revisit that later and drill down a little more.</p><p></p><p>Thank you again for participating in the first survey. Right now we’re busy gathering our awesome design team — applications closed yesterday, and we’re sorting through a LOT of them!</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.levelup5e.com/news/survey-results-1-broad-outlines" target="_blank">Continue reading...</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 8065008, member: 1"] We received thousands of votes on our first survey, which addressed the broader outlines of [I]Level Up[/I]. Thank you to everybody who participated! From the start this has been planned as a data-driven process. These results — amongst other things — help guide us as we design the game. Some folks have asked why we’ve announced this project so long before its release; it’s so that we can get data at each stage in the process, and recruit great talent for our design team (more on that later!) Anyhow, on to the survey results! Note that these questions were intentionally broad; each of these topics can be drilled into in more detail at a later stage. [SIZE=4][B]These things were very important to you[/B][/SIZE] [LIST] [*]100% compatibility with existing 5E material [*]Meaningful character choices at each advancement level [*]A fully fleshed out Exploration Pillar [*]A range of martial maneuvers to give non-spellcasters more options in combat [*]More ways to spend gold at higher levels [/LIST] [SIZE=4][B]You were positive about[/B][/SIZE] [LIST] [*]A crafting system for magic items [*]Mechanically distinctive weapons and armor [*]Culture and species being separated during character creation [*]Both a warlord class and a revised spell-less ranger [*]A more detailed skill system [/LIST] [SIZE=4][B]You are ambivalent about[/B][/SIZE] [LIST] [*]A setting toggle between cinematic and gritty modes [*]An overhaul of multiclassing [*]Kingdom or domain management, strongholds, and followers [*]Gaining ‘species’ features are your character advances [*]More core classes [*]A more tactical combat system [*]A full psionics system in the core rules [/LIST] [SIZE=4][B]You do not want[/B][/SIZE] [LIST] [*]Social combat mechanically represented [*]More core species [*]A piecemeal species-building method of character creation [*]A new initiative system [/LIST] [SIZE=4][B]And you are polarized on[/B][/SIZE] [LIST] [*]Prestige classes [*]An Immortal tier for levels 20-30 [*]Removing alignment [*]More granularity to ability checks that advantage/disadvantage [/LIST] The difference between the third (ambivalent) and last (polarized) categories is interesting. While both resulted in similar average scores, the deviation was very different. In the ambivalent category, votes were clustered around the middle of the scale, indicating no strong feelings either way. In the polarized category, votes were clustered at each end of the scale, indicating that there are two distinct, but strong-feeling camps on those topics. The results came out mainly as we thought they would, with a couple of exceptions — we thought psionics and domain management would score higher. The latter covered a couple of different concepts, though (kingdoms, domains, strongholds, followers) so we will likely revisit that later and drill down a little more. Thank you again for participating in the first survey. Right now we’re busy gathering our awesome design team — applications closed yesterday, and we’re sorting through a LOT of them! [URL='https://www.levelup5e.com/news/survey-results-1-broad-outlines']Continue reading...[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (A5E)
Survey Results #1: Broad Outlines
Top