D&D 5E Volo's 5e vs Tasha's 5e where do you see 5e heading?

[Ruin Explorer]

There is no new change, Beyond's data is always filtered to only show characters actually seeing use in play, per Adam in all of of relevant videos.

Source.

You've not linked a video, you've linked a tweet with no video attached. Don't know if you just messed.

Crawford's first claim is just what we both agree - most characters don't have Feats. That's not the same as "most players don't use Feats", which is what you seemed to be saying. He does then say players, but that doesn't match up with his prior statement.

One of the videos with the filtered data was cited earlier in this thread. Adam repeatedly detailed in comments for these videos that they were only counting characters that showed signs of being used.

Where? 36 pages mate, so to me that's just another unsourced claim.

 

[Parmandur]

Source.

You've not linked a video, you've linked a tweet with no video attached. Don't know if you just messed.

Crawford's first claim is just what we both agree - most characters don't have Feats. That's not the same as "most players don't use Feats", which is what you seemed to be saying. He does then say players, but that doesn't match up with his prior statement.

Where? 36 pages mate, so to me that's just another unsourced claim.

Players = characters. It's the same difference.

Look, man, @BadEye explained as much of the methodology as he could on these boards even, I'm not going to do your homework for you. Beyond was always filtering for active characters.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Players = characters. It's the same difference.

Nope. That's absolutely not true. That's not a fact, and claiming it as such is beyond disingenuous.

Look, man, @BadEye explained as much of the methodology as he could on these boards even, I'm not going to do your homework for you. Beyond was always filtering for active characters.

You've made five or six unsourced claims now. You are the one making the claim of fact. Either stop saying it's a fact, or don't try and push off proving your claims on to others. This outright shoddy behaviour on your part frankly, at this point. I've already "done my homework" and come up blank on what you're claiming is present.

 

[Parmandur]

Nope. That's absolutely not true. That's not a fact, and claiming it as such is beyond disingenuous.

You've made five or six unsourced claims now. You are the one making the claim of fact. Either stop saying it's a fact, or don't try and push off proving your claims on to others. This outright shoddy behaviour on your part frankly, at this point. I've already "done my homework" and come up blank on what you're claiming is present.

Look, Adam Bradford discussed the topic a lot on these forums, but I found the following representative quote:

We have previously shared that there is no foolproof way to guarantee that any of these characters are being actively played, but take reasonable steps to filter the data the best that we can. For instance, we look at characters that have leveled up on different days and have adjusted hit points in the past and taken short or long rests, etc.

And we have far more than 30 million characters. The 30 million number is filtered down to what we reasonably call "active."

So, yes, it's not foolproof, but the data is filtered for active characters.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Look, Adam Bradford discussed the topic a lot on these forums, but I found the following representative quote:


So, yes, it's not foolproof, but the data is filtered for active characters.

That's helpful, thank you, that's what I was looking for. I know they shared data before this they started doing this (the 538 figures were from 2017 for example had their limiting parameters outlined - it was merely "created between Aug 15 and Sept 15 2017") because it was an early criticism, but at some point by December 2019 they'd started trying at least.

It's a real pity they don't have like an API where we could get anonymized data about characters but I suppose someone would abuse it someone.

 

[Parmandur]

That's helpful, thank you, that's what I was looking for. I know they shared data before this they started doing this (the 538 figures were from 2017 for example had their limiting parameters outlined - it was merely "created between Aug 15 and Sept 15 2017") because it was an early criticism, but at some point by December 2019 they'd started trying at least.

It's a real pity they don't have like an API where we could get anonymized data about characters but I suppose someone would abuse it someone.

It was pretty cool of them to share as much as they have, honestly.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't get the Feat talk.

Almost everyone increases their Primary Ability Score to 20 before thinking about doing anything else. And for most campaigns, as WOTC states, never make it to a level where characters get to take a feat.

DnDBeyond stated that most campaigns end around level 9-11. The is before a character will a 15 or lewer in their primary score getss to increase it to 20 and has a chance to increase another score or take a feat.

This is why free feats is a popular houserule.
This is why Martial Adept and Fighting Initiate are flops.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't get the Feat talk.

Almost everyone increases their Primary Ability Score to 20 before thinking about doing anything else. And for most campaigns, as WOTC states, never make it to a level where characters get to take a feat.

DnDBeyond stated that most campaigns end around level 9-11. The is before a character will a 15 or lewer in their primary score getss to increase it to 20 and has a chance to increase another score or take a feat.

This is why free feats is a popular houserule.
This is why Martial Adept and Fighting Initiate are flops.

The point is to show how WotC operates when there is significant minority niche., as an exemplar.

 

[Minigiant]

The point is to show how WotC operates when there is significant minority niche., as an exemplar.

But Feats might not be a minority niche group due to a flaw in how 5e works.

 

[Parmandur]

But Fears might not be a minority niche group due to a flaw in how 5e works.

I admit, the existence of Feats is a flaw, but some people seem to like them, so I don't think it's all that bad.