...
This is what I am asking:
sketch... out what the demographic breakdown would be like at a basic level and what mechanical changes means to each
There is a slight overlap in the request because it's asking a related question but it's also asking you to show what those changes would do to each demographic which then leads to justification after further discussion. All you do is invite people to list how they would change it but not immediately explore the ramifications of those choices -- you allow people to hide by not forcing people to confront those immediate consequences.
And sure you can say that people are very capable of doing the relevant brainwork but they certainly haven't displayed it in actual writing, I am sure they're smart individuals in some fashion or another etc. But do they show it here? No, not really. Like go through this thread and many others and just try to poke holes in everyone's arguments and see what fallacies people manage to stack up. How many is-ought / fact-value errors can you catch along the way? How many issues get conflated? The count goes on and there's little to no accountability.
I see some people with huge gaming and DMing experience, sure, but I also have huge gaming experience. But none of that is actually relevant when it comes to analyzing systems and logic now does it?
It also probably doesn't give you the experience of being open and vulnerable in search for the best solution of any given thing.
Lastly, you say to get constructive you prefer not to do unnecessary work before committing which is fine, but tell me then what is necessary? Where does making sure your argument is as sound as possible stand in your scale?
And what if a poll system never comes to the forum, what then? Are you going to keep on waiting and waiting?
Let me put it this way, you can arrive to a lot of things based on pure reason (which implies genuine discussion) and there are plenty of tools in that domain that are great for abstraction (which is what you're going to do once you break the numbers down anyways). There's also a lot more people can learn from each other while exploring that and refining their opinions to deliver better arguments for why BG3 should tilt one way or another.
"There is a slight overlap in the request because it's asking a related question but it's also asking you to show what those changes would do to each demographic which then leads to justification after further discussion. All you do is invite people to list how they would change it but not immediately explore the ramifications of those choices -- you allow people to hide by not forcing people to confront those immediate consequences."
That's right. Because not everyone is capable of exploring the ramifications on their own. And that doesn't make the opinions of these people less important, _unless_ Larian chooses differently. Pure, honest opinion is fine, even though thought-out answers are so much better for those who have the time to read it, and care about the result.
"And sure you can say that people are very capable of doing the relevant brainwork but they certainly haven't displayed it in actual writing, I am sure they're smart individuals in some fashion or another etc. But do they show it here? No, not really. Like go through this thread and many others and just try to poke holes in everyone's arguments and see what fallacies people manage to stack up. How many is-ought / fact-value errors can you catch along the way? How many issues get conflated? The count goes on and there's little to no accountability."
I agree with the part about looking for holes. That's why it is important to get all this brain energy in a constructive direction. But about people's potential I would disagree - I think this is the best we have, that potential is capable to help make this game better, given some thought and time (and it seems we can't escape bickering). Otherwise, I would not have registered on this forum at all.
"I see some people with huge gaming and DMing experience, sure, but I also have huge gaming experience. But none of that is actually relevant when it comes to analyzing systems and logic now does it?
It also probably doesn't give you the experience of being open and vulnerable in search for the best solution of any given thing."
But analysis and logic is just the part of the required process here, not the whole. About being open and vulnerable - why do you think one needs that for finding a solution? Like, open-minded? But any good DM is open-minded when s/he listens to the players' creativity. Because s/he needs to react accordingly and be fast in the decision-making. And I see people here as capable of being open-minded - mostly. The capability is not a problem, I'd say it's social/internet thing.
"Lastly, you say to get constructive you prefer not to do unnecessary work before committing which is fine, but tell me then what is necessary? Where does making sure your argument is as sound as possible stand in your scale?"
Necessary: to understand what Larian is ready to change, so as not to waste efforts (I've said of that before in this thread, few posts earlier);
Sound argument -by collecting data and staying on course (because provoked emotions may criticially derail the process).
"And what if a poll system never comes to the forum, what then? Are you going to keep on waiting and waiting?"
Yes, - I'm not that commited yet to start without tools. Unless I know for sure that my work won't go to the trash can (which of course I don't).
And even with the tools, I'm going to ask for help. Yours, for example, if you would like to actually help with that. To separate which questions are in the area "that can be modded and Larian wouldn't go there" from "actually could be changed/updated at this stage". It would need alot of brainpower and accuracy to ask all the right questions and make it laconic - people would read only what is given to them in an easy-to-read form. As you can see, it would require a coordination process, with Larian as well. And I'm open to suggestions what else could be accomplished with this data gathering, for the game.
"Let me put it this way, you can arrive to a lot of things based on pure reason (which implies genuine discussion) and there are plenty of tools in that domain that are great for abstraction (which is what you're going to do once you break the numbers down anyways). There's also a lot more people can learn from each other while exploring that and refining their opinions to deliver better arguments for why BG3 should tilt one way or another."
I agree that we need a genuine discussion (the polite one).
