Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6347180" data-attributes="member: 996">Actually, no, I can't agree with that.  it all depends on the methodology.  It's not at all difficult to collect data that are worse than useless.  It also depends on what you're comparing it to.  WotC probably hasn't been flying blind the whole time, it just didn't make a show of it as they did with the playtest.  Since WotC doesn't share anything about their market research activities, we can't assume that a highly-public, obviously flawed (for a number of reasons, including, of course, being self-selecting) survey gave them any better data than whatever their usual methods were.  Not just because there's reason to suspect the survey, but because we don't know what it would be compared to.Whether you're talking assumed 'market research' in the past, or the last, showy, survey, WotC hasn't shared much about the data, meta-data, or methods used.  So if you put stock in the latest ed because it's 'based on data,' it's really little more than faith.  With each ed, there have been folks very vocally displaying that sort of faith. No, I can't agree with that, either, due to my own personal experiences.  It's the hardest thing in the world to get decision-makers to set aside their biases and agendas and look at data objectively.   Since we don't know much about the latest collection effort, and know /nothing at all/ about previous ones, we cannot make that comparison.  And now you're doing the same for 5e.  Which is great.  The game /needs/ that.</blockquote>

Verification