New D&D Survey from WOTC

[jaappleton]

Tell them what you think.

Yell at them. Tell them to make X.

Whatever floats your boat, let them know.

Just be civil. Also, thank Dan Dillon for adding Sunbeam to the Cleric list.

Really all of you please do that he was pretty instrumental in making that happen, its a spell Clerics should have always had because their vanilla list was lacking repeatable blast options and honestly Light Clerics without Sunbeam what were they thinking get it together game designers.

https://survey-d.dynata.com/survey/selfserve/53b/21051093?src=twitter#?

[Amnestic]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/561287824964452363/854451432084996116/unknown.png

I thought this was a survey not a pop quiz

[Dork_Forge]

This may have been changed now, but originally the survey also contained an NDA (with threats of fines) you had to agree to before watching a video where they basically pitched a digital tool.

*Note I did not sign said NDA

[jaappleton]

This may have been changed now, but originally the survey also contained an NDA (with threats of fines) you had to agree to before watching a video where they basically pitched a digital tool.

*Note I did not sign said NDA

This could be the “New Format” that Winninger tweeted about.

In regards to “Which is not a class?” And “What die is used for initiative?”, think of it as their attempt at “Not a robot” and “You HAVE played the game, right?”

[Sandeman]

That was probably the weirdest survey I have ever answered.
What on Earth are they going to use those answers for?

[BoutsofInsanity]

DAWG when I got that

[THACO Question]

I nearly died.

[Amnestic]

They only asked me about what I thought of PHB races+subrace features and how much money I spent on it in the last 12 months.

Weird survey but okay.

[jaappleton]

Yeah I’ve no clue what this data is for.

I thought it’d be another ‘state of game’ survey, where you tell them what settings you love and all.

Boy was I way off.

Sounds like they want to know how you feel about the PHB.

……potential new starter set incoming…? That’s all I can think of, what else PHB related is there to say? They going to errata the starting races?

[Dork_Forge]

Could be a touchstone how people feel about the existing race model since they're not so secretly moving away from it. Backhanded questions like that can lead to people giving answers that might lead to that model, when they would prefer that less than the existing one.

[deljzc]

Seems like more reach out for changes to the race system. The other stuff is just fluff (things they always ask) and the "quiz" question in the front are just to show you actually play the game.

[Amnestic]

Filling it out made me wonder if they were considering more alt-races/subraces like the UA Dragonborn/Kobolds to patch problems with the PHB versions.

in which case yeah
patch normal humans
they suck

[ZRN]

I wonder how they're parsing the correlations between the pop-quiz questions and the opinion questions.

"Hmm, all the people who don't know what Advantage is just LOVE playing tieflings!"

[Cikomyr2]

That's.. Not a WotC url

Is this a bait?

[Millstone85]

Well, the survey is stuck on a loading wheel.

Do I dare refresh the page?

Edit: It finally worked. But well, very boring survey.

[Mobius Twist]

How SATISFIED am I with darkvision?

I just chose all the in-born physical traits for races as satisfying, while all the cultural/training aspects as less satisfying. That way we can work on disconnecting the two.

[Unoriginal]

“You HAVE played the game, right?”

Sounds like the person who made this survey haven't.

Doesn't sound like they ever made a survey before, either.




Sounds like they want to know how you feel about the PHB.

……potential new starter set incoming…? That’s all I can think of, what else PHB related is there to say? They going to errata the starting races?

If this survey is legit, they may be wanting to make "do it yourself" options for race and subrace features.

Like "of course you can have a Darkvision Frost Breathing Halfling Luck custom lineage".

[PhantomSoul]

This could be the “New Format” that Winninger tweeted about.

In regards to “Which is not a class?” And “What die is used for initiative?”, think of it as their attempt at “Not a robot” and “You HAVE played the game, right?”

Oh, that's even worse than the garbage I was expecting (D&D Beyond or an in-house counterpart) and that would entirely certainly mean I would not stick with them.

This isn't April 1st, right?

[Catullus64]

Ya know, I daresay that "Satisfied" is a weird metric to use to gauge people's feelings about game features, since there are many possible qualities to "dissatisfied."

For instance, I said I was dissatisfied with Half-Elves and Dragonborn, but for very different reasons; neither "buff Half-Elves" nor "nerf Dragonborn" is the correct response to please me.

[Unoriginal]

...oh, gods and angels.


They're going to make an official play-D&D-through-Discord thing.


Welp, only one thing to say, then:


https://youtu.be/tOkdSj8Iz0I


Ya know, I daresay that "Satisfied" is a weird metric to use to gauge people's feelings about game features, since there are many possible qualities to "dissatisfied."

For instance, I said I was dissatisfied with Half-Elves and Dragonborn, but for very different reasons; neither "buff Half-Elves" nor "nerf Dragonborn" is the correct response to please me.

"Thanks to our surveys, we can now announce that a majority of D&D players are dissatisfied with races. For this reason, we will be removing them from the game."

[ProsecutorGodot]

"Thanks to our surveys, we can now announce that a majority of D&D players are dissatisfied with races. For this reason, we will be removing them from the game."

I know it's standard humans only feature*, but the fact that Ability Score increases were omitted from the other races seems telling of something.
*They also have an extra language, which is strangely included in the question about High Elves but not Humans

It also bothered to ask me about what I thought of the features of their official discord even though I told them I haven't used it. Pretty confused with this survey.

[Sparky McDibben]

That was deeply weird. Hopefully they're going to release an errata'd version of the PHB that updates sorcerers, fixes the races, etc.

[PhantomSoul]

"Thanks to our surveys, we can now announce that a majority of D&D players are dissatisfied with races. For this reason, we will be removing them from the game."

Garbage questions get garbage answers... unfortunately, they can be helpful to give garbage justification to garbage claims.

[Cikomyr2]

Is there any tweet or page on the WotC website that actually sends to this survey?

The above url is to a random survey website, and I ain't clicking on it randomly before certification. Phishing is a thing

[Nagog]

I was expecting more open ended questions, most of them were very direct and specifically about races, and the stuff I exoressed I didn't like much they didn't ask for any feedback on it.

[Hael]

I got the NDA and the err video, as well as word proofing an ad. I know it’s not enforceable, but I won’t answer details about what I saw.

[OldTrees1]

I feel I much have brought down the curve. Most of those racial features were disappointing. Some slightly, others very. Maybe they will have more interesting races in 6E?

[AmberVael]

Is there any tweet or page on the WotC website that actually sends to this survey?

The above url is to a random survey website, and I ain't clicking on it randomly before certification. Phishing is a thing

It's been linked by the verified D&D twitter account. (https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1404544179288555522)

It's normal for WotC (and a lot of other companies) to use an external survey site.

[Sparky McDibben]

I feel I much have brought down the curve. Most of those racial features were disappointing. Some slightly, others very. Maybe they will have more interesting races in 6E?

You weren't the only one. I linked dissatisfied for all the darkvisions and then went mostly downhill from there.

[Telwar]

I did the survey yesterday when I saw something about it from Bell of Lost Souls, answered no to Discord use, and did NOT get an NDA/new product.

Which does rather make the "DiscorD&D" product sound likely.

...oh god I hope they don't call it that.

[MrStabby]

Tell them what you think.

Yell at them. Tell them to make X.

Whatever floats your boat, let them know.

Just be civil. Also, thank Dan Dillon for adding Sunbeam to the Cleric list.

Really all of you please do that he was pretty instrumental in making that happen, its a spell Clerics should have always had because their vanilla list was lacking repeatable blast options and honestly Light Clerics without Sunbeam what were they thinking get it together game designers.

https://survey-d.dynata.com/survey/selfserve/53b/21051093?src=twitter#?

Well after this I expected some free text fields to fill in. Some way to provide meaningful feedback that wouldn't be misinterpreted. Now I worry that describing myself as being "dissatisfied" with something will be interpreted as thinking it to be inadequate when in reality almost all of the things I had a problem with had that problem as a result of being stronger than other options.

[EggKookoo]

Opinion surveys are so much pseudoscience. I mean, they're not without value, but it takes a lot of savvy to interpret the responses in any meaningful way.

[MaxWilson]

Just be civil. Also, thank Dan Dillon for adding Sunbeam to the Cleric list.

It's not on the cleric list. Tasha's merely has an optional, DM-gated Cleric 1 ability for a PC Cleric to add certain non-cleric spells to their spell list, but Divine Souls for example still can't cast Sunbeam without taking Cleric 1.

[Sigreid]

Stopped when they asked for my age. not their business.

[LudicSavant]

Opinion surveys are so much pseudoscience. I mean, they're not without value, but it takes a lot of savvy to interpret the responses in any meaningful way.

Yeah it's really, really easy for people to draw inaccurate conclusions from surveys. Especially in a format like the survey I just took...

[ProsecutorGodot]

Stopped when they asked for my age. not their business.

So just lie about it, children do it all the time online.

Awfully weird thing to be hung up about, companies want to know what their demographic is and if your age (that it does nothing to verify) is the most private information the survey asks for I'm not sure what the hang-up is.

Though, with the actual content on the survey, you're not missing much skipping out. The questions seem tailored to reinforce the current trends whichever way you answer.

[Imbalance]

How dare they assume that I'm less than 101 years old? Bunch of bs.
"How much did you spend on books?"
I dunno, bought the Candlekeep on Amazon, scored some used ones off eBay...fiddy?
"Please enter a whole number."
<sigh>50
"How much did you spend on fake virtual books?"
NOTHING, FOOLS!
"Please enter a whole number."
0
"How much did you spend on services?"
0.0
"..."
"How much did you spend on min....?"
MORE THAN THREE GRAND, OK? YES, I HAVE A PROBLEM!
"Please enter..."
Shut up!
:smallfurious:

[jaappleton]

Snip

This was an emotional rollercoaster.

[Sparky McDibben]

MORE THAN THREE GRAND, OK? YES, I HAVE A PROBLEM!
"Please enter..."
Shut up!

This is a safe space, bro. Safe space.

[Hael]

Yeah it's really, really easy for people to draw inaccurate conclusions from surveys. Especially in a format like the survey I just took...

A great way to ruin your data is to create a survey that antagonizes the writer. So lets
1) Give them a test to verify if their previous statements were correct.
2) Demand their private information.
3) Give them veiled threats of legal action, before making them sign an NDA and then include a statement that insults their intelligence about the obvious nonenforceability of said threat.
4) Give them questions that force a response and which halts the survey.. So one can’t even leave questions blank if they are unsure.
5) Make them watch three minutes of a video with no sound.
6) Make them correct a PR statement with crayon colors.
7) Offer very few boxes for feedback or general remarks.
8) Make people guess how much money they spend at different time intervals on a range of products.
9) Not include various definitions of abilities that we are grading, assuming of course that everyone remembers exactly what they are from memory.

One might expect this sort of work from a high school student... so it doesn’t really muster much confidence.

[PhantomSoul]

A great way to ruin your data is to create a survey that antagonizes the writer. So lets
1) Give them a test to verify if their previous statements were correct.
2) Demand their private information.
3) Give them veiled threats of legal action, before making them sign an NDA and then include a statement that insults their intelligence about the obvious nonenforceability of said threat.
4) Give them questions that force a response and which halts the survey.. So one can’t even leave questions blank if they are unsure.
5) Make them watch three minutes of a video with no sound.
6) Make them correct a PR statement with crayon colors.
7) Offer very few boxes for feedback or general remarks.
8) Make people guess how much money they spend at different time intervals on a range of products.
9) Not include various definitions of abilities that we are grading, assuming of course that everyone remembers exactly what they are from memory.

One might expect this sort of work from a high school student... so it doesn’t really muster much confidence.

I'd expect better from non-exceptional high school students. (And younger students, too.) When you hope it's just wildly incompetent instead of preparing for dishonesty and intentional misrepresentation to the point of insulting their audience.

[EggKookoo]

https://i.imgflip.com/5dfc03.jpg

[Tanarii]

Ya know, I daresay that "Satisfied" is a weird metric to use to gauge people's feelings about game features, since there are many possible qualities to "dissatisfied."

For instance, I said I was dissatisfied with Half-Elves and Dragonborn, but for very different reasons; neither "buff Half-Elves" nor "nerf Dragonborn" is the correct response to please me.
No kidding. I'm dissatisfied with Halflings and Tieflings because of their presentation, Humans because they are UP, Half-elves because they're OP, and Tieflings and Dragonborn and Drow because because I don't feel they are appropriate in a PHB. (They should be splatbook races.)

The how many products have you bought recently question should probably be "did you buy anything since Tasha's was released". :smallamused:


You weren't the only one. I linked dissatisfied for all the darkvisions and then went mostly downhill from there.
Same for me for dark vision for all races. My dissatisfaction is I wish it wasn't a thing in D&D. (Despite it's long tradition and knowing it's probably not going away.)

[Dork_Forge]

Same for me for dark vision for all races. My dissatisfaction is I wish it wasn't a thing in D&D. (Despite it's long tradition and knowing it's probably not going away.)

It's hard to believe they don't see how heavily they messed it up, for something to be a benefit not a standard less than half the races should have it, ideally much much less than half...

I guess the bright side of the power of V. Humans is it's fairly likely someone won't have it

[Telwar]

It would have been nice if they had given more options to detail responses, like "do you think it's too/a little strong/weak, or just right," and some commentary, for each ability and then for the package as a whole.

I wonder if the race stuff was just padding for the DnDiscord...

[Imbalance]

This was an emotional rollercoaster.


This is a safe space, bro. Safe space.

S'cool, nothing a Charlotte Wessels playlist can't fix.

But yeah, freaking terrible survey.

[OldTrees1]

okay this has gone on long enough

What video?
What NDA?

I did not see either when I took the survey?

I did get a pop quiz, questions about spending, and a question about discord usage on other games (that was annoying).

[Dork_Forge]

okay this has gone on long enough

What video?
What NDA?

I did not see either when I took the survey?

I did get a pop quiz, questions about spending, and a question about discord usage on other games (that was annoying).

Not everyone gets it, the NDA is for the video which shows a digital platform (https://imgur.com/a/PBXEyX2#KCLXDbi) that looks like DDB character sheets on the screens.

[OldTrees1]

Not everyone gets it, the NDA is for the video which shows a digital platform (https://imgur.com/a/PBXEyX2#KCLXDbi) that looks like DDB character sheets on the screens.

Oh, so they are using the spending as a filter. That makes sense. I am not the target audience for that.

[Cheesegear]

Lots of questions I felt required a more in-depth answer than 'I am Satisfied or Dissatisfied.'
Because a lot of species' abilities have certain uses depending on the DM, and in some cases, can change an entire campaign. So even if I don't like an ability for one species, for a specific class, that ability might be really good, when used with a different class.

That species' ability might be garbage in a DM's campaign. But in another campaign it solves almost every encounter.

INVALID. PLEASE INDICATE THE AMOUNT YOU HAVE SPENT ON MINIATURES?

A lot. Please let me say 'a lot' and then just leave it. I don't have my receipts. I don't know. All's I know is that my missus is mad at me please leave me alone.

THE SURVEY DEMANDS A NUMBER.

Well lessee, there was Wave 12...Wave 13...Wave 14...Then there was some more minis I bought from other companies.
Look. I've lost count. There was a pandemic. Leave me alone.
I don't know.
I don't know.

Cries in the corner.

[Sandeman]

It isnt a good survey when after finishing answering it, you feel like you have just been abused.

[Warder]

I guess it's no loss that I missed it? The survey seems to have been taken down. That twitter thread though, wow. Many of the comments read like failed Intimidation checks.

[Millstone85]

That twitter thread though, wow. Many of the comments read like failed Intimidation checks.There was a tweet?

[LudicSavant]

I guess it's no loss that I missed it? The survey seems to have been taken down. That twitter thread though, wow. Many of the comments read like failed Intimidation checks.

What twitter thread?

[Warder]

There was a tweet?


What twitter thread?

Oh sorry, the link was on the first page of this thread.

Here it is again: https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1404544179288555522

[EggKookoo]

Not everyone gets it, the NDA is for the video which shows a digital platform (https://imgur.com/a/PBXEyX2#KCLXDbi) that looks like DDB character sheets on the screens.

I noticed that DnDB sheet too. I like DndBeyond, but it's woefully understaffed or underfunded or something. Might be nice if it got some real resources.

[Xervous]

Here’s expecting Bethesda quality digital product.

[Unoriginal]

Oh sorry, the link was on the first page of this thread.

Here it is again: https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1404544179288555522

Looks more like the survey was a failed CHA (Intimidation) check.

[jaappleton]

Regarding D&D Beyond: It was developed and owned by Curse, which owns Twitch. Or the other way around…. I forget. Sorry.

Later sold to Fandom.

Bradford and many of the original faces left near the beginning of 2021. And this may sound harsh but good riddance. Seriously. I try not to be too harsh on people but Bradford was terrible at the helm. At no point did they even try to attempt to implement the Class Feature Variant UA which was eventually in Tasha’s, then as Tasha’s came out they had to scramble, slap and glue together functionality to make most of it work. And during the update videos all we ever heard was “it’s complex, things are being worked on” with ZERO progress. MEANWHILE, Life Cleric bonus healing still hadn’t been implemented and Divine Souls couldn’t change their bonus spell they get based on Alignment.

The new management, led by Joe Starr (seriously), has been much better and also MUCH more transparent in what’s being worked on. They inherited a mess and they’re actually making headway.

So… rant over.

Anyways it’s not run by WOTC. They’re partnered with WOTC, just like Fantasy Grounds and Roll20.

But WOTC does not have their own digital toolset. However, WOTC is run by Chris C. Google his name, writing it is a legit rules violation. He was a head digital guy for Microsoft. He wants digital tools. Why keep farming it out when you can keep all the money and do it yourself? Makes sense, business wise, and the cost to develop it would be minimal when you consider how much their profits have soared.

Hopefully if it happens it goes much better than the 4E toolset made with Microsoft Silverlight…. I shudder just thinking by about that. And the story behind that, and the murder-suicide that led to the radical pivot in 4E’s design. Most don’t know about that one, and this isn’t the topic for it. Suffice to say 4E’s release and how it was played was… supposed to be a lot different.

…And one day maybe I’ll tell the story about the 5E toolset they tried BEFORE D&D Beyond was a thing, Codename: Morningstar. But that’s another topic.

[Imbalance]

…And one day maybe I’ll tell the story about the 5E toolset they tried BEFORE D&D Beyond was a thing, Codename: Morningstar. But that’s another topic.

This one?: https://www.codenamemorningstar.com/

I stumbled upon that a while back after Golem Arcana was almost a thing and was curious, but not too curious, since the last update mentioned iOS 8.

[jaappleton]

This one?: https://www.codenamemorningstar.com/

I stumbled upon that a while back after Golem Arcana was almost a thing and was curious, but not too curious, since the last update mentioned iOS 8.

Surprised that site is still up.

Yeah. That one.

[Warder]

Looks more like the survey was a failed CHA (Intimidation) check.

Yes, that too. Now I wish I could've seen it before they took it down!

[Sparky McDibben]

Man, you know it has to be BAD if Wizard's actually listened. Reminds me of the time Wells Fargo tried doing an AMA during the Great Recession.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Man, that Twitter thread is brutal. Makes me glad that I don't use social media. Damn.

[Sparky McDibben]

Man, that Twitter thread is brutal. Makes me glad that I don't use social media. Damn.

I know, right? The response about "This survey is about as well-designed as your game" made me crack up, though.

[Catullus64]

Ok, I don't think the survey is particularly well-crafted, but I also don't get the people who seem to think that it was actively offensive.

Maybe I'm naive, but the so-called "gatekeeping" questions about basic rules and classes didn't seem sinister to me. Both Xanathar's and Tasha's contain sections addressing common misconceptions about the rules, so I assume these questions were to help gauge whether there are widespread misconceptions about those rules.

As for the relative shallowness of the Satisfied-Dissatisfied answer choices, it seems like an overreaction to assume that they'll use those responses in bad faith to justify pre-made choices. I think it's really as simple as "What are people happy with? Ok, let's dedicate our finite resources to figuring out why the stuff people dislike isn't working; we can get more specific feedback when we come up with variants and changes for people to playtest."

The survey was a little clunky, but from reading some of this thread, and the linked Twitter thread, you'd think it was a war crime.

[Unoriginal]

Ok, I don't think the survey is particularly well-crafted, but I also don't get the people who seem to think that it was actively offensive.

Maybe I'm naive, but the so-called "gatekeeping" questions about basic rules and classes didn't seem sinister to me. Both Xanathar's and Tasha's contain sections addressing common misconceptions about the rules, so I assume these questions were to help gauge whether there are widespread misconceptions about those rules.

The people who reacted strongly were the ones who faced strong gatekeeping in the hobby for years. I don't think the survey intentionally did it, but at that point it's just tone-deaf.



As for the relative shallowness of the Satisfied-Dissatisfied answer choices, it seems like an overreaction to assume that they'll use those responses in bad faith to justify pre-made choices. I think it's really as simple as "What are people happy with? Ok, let's dedicate our finite resources to figuring out why the stuff people dislike isn't working; we can get more specific feedback when we come up with variants and changes for people to playtest."

The survey was a little clunky, but from reading some of this thread, and the linked Twitter thread, you'd think it was a war crime.

It was more than a little clunky. There was no way WotC could learn anything useful from it.

[PhantomSoul]

It was more than a little clunky. There was no way WotC could learn anything useful from it.

That seems like an incredibly generous take. It's basically unfathomable to design a survey you want actual information from that badly.

[Mitchellnotes]

I didn't get to take the survey, but that it was pulled so quickly and the comments about what was on it make me think the planning of it went something like this:

Intern 1: "Hey intern 2, do you still have access to the twitter account?"
Intern 2: "Sure do! Remember, we can't push out funny memes anymore..."
Intern 1: "That's a bummer, but that's not what I was hoping to do. You know that survey I've been working on? I'm ready to push it out."
Intern 2: "Nice! How'd it get approved so quickly?"
Intern 1: "Heh, you know me... I'm an ask forgiveness, not approval kind of person!"
Intern 2: "Doesn't this survey include some confidential product info?"
Intern 1: "It's cool, I thought of that! I've included an NDA in it which. I googled a sample for it and everything!"
Intern 2: "Sweet! That looks super legit. If this doesn't pan out, you should totally go into law!"
Intern 1: "I know, right? Anyway, here's the link!"
Intern 2: "Got it! Posted!!"
Intern 1: "Man, WOTC is going to be so stoked when these results start coming in... best survey ever!"
Intern 2: "You do such good work!"

[Dienekes]

Ok, I don't think the survey is particularly well-crafted, but I also don't get the people who seem to think that it was actively offensive.

Maybe I'm naive, but the so-called "gatekeeping" questions about basic rules and classes didn't seem sinister to me. Both Xanathar's and Tasha's contain sections addressing common misconceptions about the rules, so I assume these questions were to help gauge whether there are widespread misconceptions about those rules.

I kinda agree here. Admittedly I only went through about 15% before something came up. And the test was taken down before I could return to it. But, from what I saw the gatekeeping question seemed more about weeding out bots or bad faith actors than anything insidious. Mind you, they could’ve just explained their reasoning if that were the case. Some people will still be put off by it, certainly. But it’s the internet, that happens with everything.

As of now, just dropping it seems like they got their hand caught in the cookie jar. Or they went into panic mode, which is pretty much never a good look. Perhaps down the line a more reasonable explanation will be given. I do think this was an attempt to solve an issue without realizing you were accidentally treading into a different one. But that happens sometimes. It’s not really a big deal unless their response is terrible.



As for the relative shallowness of the Satisfied-Dissatisfied answer choices, it seems like an overreaction to assume that they'll use those responses in bad faith to justify pre-made choices. I think it's really as simple as "What are people happy with? Ok, let's dedicate our finite resources to figuring out why the stuff people dislike isn't working; we can get more specific feedback when we come up with variants and changes for people to playtest."

The survey was a little clunky, but from reading some of this thread, and the linked Twitter thread, you'd think it was a war crime.

Here’s my issue. WotC just recently dropped a big change to races. And my opinion on whether I am satisfied with the race depends dramatically if I am supposed to be taking that into account or not. I literally do not know how to answer their question. This makes my responses potentially wildly wrong. Even if they are not intentionally trying to skew their data.

That’s just bad survey design really. Like a lot of WotC recent work, I think I can see what they’re trying to go for, but wow this needed another edit.

[Catullus64]

Here’s my issue. WotC just recently dropped a big change to races. And my opinion on whether I am satisfied with the race depends dramatically if I am supposed to be taking that into account or not. I literally do not know how to answer their question. This makes my responses potentially wildly wrong. Even if they are not intentionally trying to skew their data.

That’s just bad survey design really. Like a lot of WotC recent work, I think I can see what they’re trying to go for, but wow this needed another edit.

I mean... the rules for Races in the Player's Handbook (which is expressly what the survey asked about) haven't changed. There are new, optional rules regarding race in other publications, but the survey never gave one mention to those, so I don't know why you would factor those into your response.

Again, the survey was poorly written and its intent is a bit unclear, but I don't think that presumption of bad faith is really warranted.

[Sigreid]

So just lie about it, children do it all the time online.

Awfully weird thing to be hung up about, companies want to know what their demographic is and if your age (that it does nothing to verify) is the most private information the survey asks for I'm not sure what the hang-up is.

Though, with the actual content on the survey, you're not missing much skipping out. The questions seem tailored to reinforce the current trends whichever way you answer.

We all have our lines. :smallbiggrin:

[EggKookoo]

Anyways it’s not run by WOTC. They’re partnered with WOTC, just like Fantasy Grounds and Roll20.

I don't think it's impossible to imagine WotC buying it, though. It has great branding and a relatively solid foundation. And imagine the goodwill generated if they tell us our DnDBeyond purchases are still good even through the changeover. I mean they could almost immediately release an official 5.5e set of core rulebooks and I'd probably buy them just because they didn't instantly invalidate my older digital copies.

As opposed to WotC coming up with a competing project. I have trouble seeing how they'd woo me over to their new application if I can't bring my DnDBeyond purchases over. And if they revoked DnDB's license in order to do that... well... that won't go over well.

Basically I don't see a way WotC could have their own system without simply folding DnDBeyond into it. Add that DnDB needs some help in the management and resources department (at least from my outside perspective -- the whole thing feels stalled out), and it's kind of a no-brainer.

[jaappleton]

I don't think it's impossible to imagine WotC buying it, though. It has great branding and a relatively solid foundation. And imagine the goodwill generated if they tell us our DnDBeyond purchases are still good even through the changeover. I mean they could almost immediately release an official 5.5e set of core rulebooks and I'd probably buy them just because they didn't instantly invalidate my older digital copies.

As opposed to WotC coming up with a competing project. I have trouble seeing how they'd woo me over to their new application if I can't bring my DnDBeyond purchases over. And if they revoked DnDB's license in order to do that... well... that won't go over well.

Basically I don't see a way WotC could have their own system without simply folding DnDBeyond into it. Add that DnDB needs some help in the management and resources department (at least from my outside perspective -- the whole thing feels stalled out), and it's kind of a no-brainer.

I'd like to see WOTC purchase DDB for one reason, and its quite an obvious one:

They could internally share documents in advance and the DDB team could have everything ready to roll (HA!) on day one.

Unearthed Arcana! Available on DDB the instant the article drops.

They'd know all the finalized content of a book the same time the design team does.

Buy it on DDB, where its all ready to go part and parcel with the design team...... unlike the competitors.

It'd certainly be easier for WOTC to buy an existing thing, whether FantasyGrounds or Roll20 or DDB or whatever, than to develop something from scratch.

Also, starting up a whole new toolset NOW when 5E is quite a few years into its life cycle is... Questionable. Of course 5E is still going incredibly strong, and I personally believe 2024 (the 50th anniversary of D&D) is going to coincide with the launch of 5.5E (As in large changes, maybe not officially called a new edition but essentially it'll be 5.5E). So it'd only be smart to develop a whole digital toolset from scratch if they plan on going AT LEAST another 5 years with the current edition, or an edition very close to it (5.5E). I think 5th, in its entirety (including a potential 5.5) is here to stay until at least 2030. They might start a playtest on an entirely new edition prior to that, like maybe internally at 2029 or around there, but will fully support 5E for the remainder of this decade.

[Necrosnoop110]

Thank you for your interest in our survey! Unfortunately, the survey is no longer open. We hope that you choose to participate in future surveys with us.
:smallfurious:

[Dork_Forge]

I'd like to see WOTC purchase DDB for one reason, and its quite an obvious one:

They could internally share documents in advance and the DDB team could have everything ready to roll (HA!) on day one.

Unearthed Arcana! Available on DDB the instant the article drops.

They'd know all the finalized content of a book the same time the design team does.

Buy it on DDB, where its all ready to go part and parcel with the design team...... unlike the competitors.

It'd certainly be easier for WOTC to buy an existing thing, whether FantasyGrounds or Roll20 or DDB or whatever, than to develop something from scratch.

Also, starting up a whole new toolset NOW when 5E is quite a few years into its life cycle is... Questionable. Of course 5E is still going incredibly strong, and I personally believe 2024 (the 50th anniversary of D&D) is going to coincide with the launch of 5.5E (As in large changes, maybe not officially called a new edition but essentially it'll be 5.5E). So it'd only be smart to develop a whole digital toolset from scratch if they plan on going AT LEAST another 5 years with the current edition, or an edition very close to it (5.5E). I think 5th, in its entirety (including a potential 5.5) is here to stay until at least 2030. They might start a playtest on an entirely new edition prior to that, like maybe internally at 2029 or around there, but will fully support 5E for the remainder of this decade.

Who is DDB competing with? VTTs are a separate sphere, DDB may want to end up there one day (development of dice rolling etc.) but they're different types of platform. Just look at adventures, if you play online and you're only going to buy the book digitally once, are you going to buy it on DDB and then do all of the legwork yourself? Or are you going to buy it on a VTT where the game is already set up for you to run?

DDB is entirely a companion tool by default (with their Avrae bot trying to claim the Discord playspace) and whilst they can certainly improve, their only real competitor at the moment for what they do is mobile apps that usually only have SRD content.

I'm hoping that if they are bought though it'll facilitate giving us full downloadable PDFs of the content we buy, atm I think you can only view a PDF within the mobile app which is... not good.

[Necrosnoop110]

Man, that Twitter thread is brutal. Makes me glad that I don't use social media. Damn.
Anyone got a link for this?

[Millstone85]

Anyone got a link for this?Third page edition. :smallsmile:


It's been linked by the verified D&D twitter account. (https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1404544179288555522)

It's normal for WotC (and a lot of other companies) to use an external survey site.
Oh sorry, the link was on the first page of this thread.

Here it is again: https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1404544179288555522

[MrStabby]

Ok, I don't think the survey is particularly well-crafted, but I also don't get the people who seem to think that it was actively offensive.

Maybe I'm naive, but the so-called "gatekeeping" questions about basic rules and classes didn't seem sinister to me. Both Xanathar's and Tasha's contain sections addressing common misconceptions about the rules, so I assume these questions were to help gauge whether there are widespread misconceptions about those rules.

As for the relative shallowness of the Satisfied-Dissatisfied answer choices, it seems like an overreaction to assume that they'll use those responses in bad faith to justify pre-made choices. I think it's really as simple as "What are people happy with? Ok, let's dedicate our finite resources to figuring out why the stuff people dislike isn't working; we can get more specific feedback when we come up with variants and changes for people to playtest."

The survey was a little clunky, but from reading some of this thread, and the linked Twitter thread, you'd think it was a war crime.

I mean it isn't physically harming me or my family. It isn't that bad...

It is just painful because it is so easy to do something so much better. You don't need deep expertise for that - just thinking and planning ahead how you would respond to different results and test it internally a bit first.

The enthusiasm here for actually completing it shows how much good-will there is for doing these things. Good-will they squander by doing something that their customers are thinking will be misinterpreted, misused or just be plain dropped because it tells them nothing useful.

[Imbalance]

Poorly crafted and useless? Yes. Offensive? I wouldn't say so, but I can't speak for Twitterfolk.

It was less like a survey and more like a C=64 era text adventure where you had to prove worthiness to the gods before even getting the quest. For those who feel like they missed it - don't worry. I went through it several times on different browsers trying for the good ending. I'm sure at least some of my fake responses represented your thoughts.

[Xervous]

Twitterfolk.


Name too long. Call them twits on theme with their constant brevity.

[Delnatha]

Really the problem goes back to the original use of the term “race” in D&D. In my simplified imagination I see the whole process unfolding like this:

People who don’t really play D&D: “omg, it’s 2020 and we are striving for racial equality and you have a game where some races are inherently more evil, stupider, weaker, and less attractive than other races?!? Cancel D&D

D&D: “oh no. It’s the 80s all over again! Wait! *scribbles 3 pages of TCE*. “Look! All races are equal now. Same stat bonuses wherever you want them! Done! Phew!”

Players: “So now why would I play this race with these lame racial abilities when I can get the same stats playing this other race with much more powerful racial abilities?”

D&D: “Damn, the races still aren’t balanced? Hey you! Intern! We need to figure out what our players think of all the racial abilities so we can balance things properly Make a survey listing all of them and how satisfied the players are with them.”

[KorvinStarmast]

survey is closed. Didn't leave it up long. Not sure they cared about feedback.

The enthusiasm here for actually completing it shows how much good-will there is for doing these things. Good-will they squander by doing something that their customers are thinking will be misinterpreted, misused or just be plain dropped because it tells them nothing useful.
Well played. :smallcool:

[PhantomSoul]

survey is closed. Didn't leave it up long. Not sure they cared about feedback.

Well played. :smallcool:

Kinda looked like they cared to the extent they specifically wanted garbage results they could claim was consistent with the garbage they wanted to do anyway and/or to claim the garbage they've done was good.

[quindraco]

Really the problem goes back to the original use of the term “race” in D&D. In my simplified imagination I see the whole process unfolding like this:

People who don’t really play D&D: “omg, it’s 2020 and we are striving for racial equality and you have a game where some races are inherently more evil, stupider, weaker, and less attractive than other races?!? Cancel D&D

D&D: “oh no. It’s the 80s all over again! Wait! *scribbles 3 pages of TCE*. “Look! All races are equal now. Same stat bonuses wherever you want them! Done! Phew!”

Players: “So now why would I play this race with these lame racial abilities when I can get the same stats playing this other race with much more powerful racial abilities?”

D&D: “Damn, the races still aren’t balanced? Hey you! Intern! We need to figure out what our players think of all the racial abilities so we can balance things properly Make a survey listing all of them and how satisfied the players are with them.”

The first, best move they can make here is formally declaring a nomenclature change from race to species.