D&D (2024) What is your oppinion of 5.24 so far?

[mellored]

Just curious, but has there been any word about putting out a new/revised Starter Set with the 5.24 rules?

Greyhawk is added to the DMG. And I think a sample adventure along with it.

But that's all I heard thus far.

 

[Parmandur]

Greyhawk is added to the DMG. And I think a sample adventure along with it.

But that's all I heard thus far.

Five sample Adventures ,with 15 Beyond activated maps, actually.

 

[mamba]

I did not state it as fact.

not only that, you engaged in baseless speculation, otherwise make a case

Nope. You really mix up logic with wild guessing.

there is zero guessing involved in what I wrote. Where guessing would come in is if I tried to quantify how much of an impact this had on the polls, but I did not do that…

Impossible, because we don't have WotC's data and methods.* I also don't say they are infalliable.

and yet you use them as a basis for dismissing my point without even engaging with it, so yes, you take it as infallible or at a minimum with it clearly being right and me being wrong with nothing to actually base this on

I tried. But there is really nothing in it that makes sense. You make claims that are probably untrue (you might be right, but we don't know, but it is unlilely).

sorry, but it really is completely logical, there is nothing ‘probably untrue’ about it. The one question is how much of a difference it makes, not whether this is happening

So please stop making accusations you cannot prove

there is nothing that cannot be logically deduced in what I wrote. I do not need their poll data and logic to know it is happening

 

[Oofta]

not only that, you engaged in baseless speculation, otherwise make a case


there is zero guessing involved in what I wrote. Where guessing would come in is if I tried to quantify how much of an impact this had on the polls, but I did not do that…


and yet you use them as a basis for dismissing my point without even engaging with it, so yes, you take it as infallible or at a minimum with it clearly being right and me being wrong with nothing to actually base this on


sorry, but it really is completely logical, there is nothing ‘probably untrue’ about it. The one question is how much of a difference it makes, not whether this is happening


there is nothing that cannot be logically deduced in what I wrote. I do not need their poll data and logic to know it is happening

I can't prove that people from [insert a random city or country] are not all cannibals. I can just state that there is no evidence that they are and there is no evidence or logical justification for saying they are.

While no one can prove that all values between 2 and 4 are ignored, there is no evidence they are ignored. The statement does ignore intricacies of how polling actually works. If they only cared about yes/no/undecided they didn't need the numbers 1 through 5 since there would have been no reason to include the numbers 2 through 4. Just like there's no evidence of a large number of people disappearing on a regular basis from those hypothetically cannibalistic regions.

You have no evidence that they only care about 1 or 5 and have stated no convincing justification for it. Meanwhile people that actually do have knowledge of how polls are used for analysis have told you that you're wrong.

 

[FrogReaver]

I can't prove that people from [insert a random city or country] are not all cannibals. I can just state that there is no evidence that they are and there is no evidence or logical justification for saying they are.

While no one can prove that all values between 2 and 4 are ignored, there is no evidence they are ignored. The statement does ignore intricacies of how polling actually works. If they only cared about yes/no/undecided they didn't need the numbers 1 through 5 since there would have been no reason to include the numbers 2 through 4. Just like there's no evidence of a large number of people disappearing on a regular basis from those hypothetically cannibalistic regions.

You have no evidence that they only care about 1 or 5 and have stated no convincing justification for it. Meanwhile people that actually do have knowledge of how polls are used for analysis have told you that you're wrong.

Net promoter score is a very common thing. On a scale of 1-5 it typically treats 5 as the only good response, 1-3 as equally bad responses and 4 is ignored.

I’m not saying that’s what they used, or that they used something remotely close to this, but it is a real thing with some polling.

 

[mamba]

I can't prove that people from [insert a random city or country] are not all cannibals. I can just state that there is no evidence that they are and there is no evidence or logical justification for saying they are.

sure, but I do have logical justification, what I do not have is how many cannibals there are in the city, to stay with your analogy

While no one can prove that all values between 2 and 4 are ignored, there is no evidence they are ignored.

again, I never claimed they are, this is now at least the second time I am saying this in a reply to you

You have no evidence that they only care about 1 or 5 and have stated no convincing justification for it. Meanwhile people that actually do have knowledge of how polls are used for analysis have told you that you're wrong.

the problem is that what you tell me I am wrong about is not something I ever claimed. All it shows is you not understanding the point I am making, you are not refuting it

 

[Oofta]

Net promoter score is a very common thing. On a scale of 1-5 it typically treats 5 as the only good response, 1-3 as equally bad responses and 4 is ignored.

I’m not saying that’s what they used, or that they used something remotely close to this, but it is a real thing with some polling.

They could have also shifted their analysis methods as they got closer to a final product. They talked about some ideas that they proposed early on that weren't quite there and needed tweaking. When they were nailing down final details, they may have used a different method. We simply don't know.

But what I reject is the assumption that they used one method over another as a fait accompli.

 

[Oofta]

sure, but I do have logical justification, what I do not have is how many are cannibals, to stay with your analogy

You know what, I think we've derailed things long enough. If I post anything more on this particular topic it's probably my evil twin Skippy. Or is this Skippy posting this? Tis a mystery.

 

[Scott Christian]

They seem fun, and in my experience, this will work out fine. The only thing that brings me caution is the amount of time it will take for combat. I can already tell it will take longer, and that is not an improvement for our table.

 

[FrogReaver]

They could have also shifted their analysis methods as they got closer to a final product. They talked about some ideas that they proposed early on that weren't quite there and needed tweaking. When they were nailing down final details, they may have used a different method. We simply don't know.

But what I reject is the assumption that they used one method over another as a fait accompli.

I agree with that but I read @mamba as talking more about what we can know for sure about what our responses mean and I think he’s right, we can only really know what 1 and 5 mean to them without them telling us the rest. 1 is rejection. 5 is acceptance. That’s true of every realistic way they might do this.