D&D 5E Dungeonscape no more?

[DEFCON 1]

Then how did http://pathguy.com/ddnext.htm manage to do it?

Manage to do what? Create a rather crappy javascript program with a barely adequate user interface that produces a butt-ugly and uninspiring character sheet with no descriptive text whatsoever? I have no idea. But I *do know* nobody would ever actually pay to use it.

 

[casterblaster]

A lot of these posts on here are hilarious, I mean really. WoTC cant do anything right to a lot of folks. I understand being burned and fool me once type things but come on.

 

[SkidAce]

When it comes to e-tools, some people's opinions are that its been more than "once".

Hence the litany of shame on them.

 

[mcbobbo]

Manage to do what? Create a rather crappy javascript program with a barely adequate user interface that produces a butt-ugly and uninspiring character sheet with no descriptive text whatsoever? I have no idea.

Here's the standard you set:

getting a working Character Builder released at the same time as the PH

You never said it couldn't be 'butt ugly' or that descriptive text was required. You also haven't demonstrated how ugliness or descriptive text creates additional barriers that would be exacerbated by last minute changes to the PHB.

But I *do know* nobody would ever actually pay to use it.

It's free. Why pay for free things? But that doesn't preclude the possibility of someone paying for 'a working Character Builder' with more appeal.

From what I can tell, that site is pretty popular and works well. If you're aware of something to the contrary that says I used a bad example, please do share.

 

[billd91]

A lot of these posts on here are hilarious, I mean really. WoTC cant do anything right to a lot of folks. I understand being burned and fool me once type things but come on.

I agree that the emotions run higher than they need to, but it is true that WotC has a pretty impressive track record of failures and disappointments with digital initiatives compared to other companies. It may be that, as the 800 pound gorilla, they think D&D has to engage in more ambitious projects or warrants special protection compared other games, but if that's true, I don't think that mindset is serving them very well.

 

[hardvice]

The good news is that, judging by the reaction here and other places online, it's pretty clear that there's plenty of interest in and demand for digital tools above and beyond PDFs (though that would definitely be a nice place to start).

That's good. WOTC is going to have to do *something*, even if "something" means nothing more than releasing some kind of licensing terms. The fact that they took a stab at DungeonScape's idea of integrating text and tools at the very least indicates that they were thinking of digital tools as part of their strategy, so it's unlikely they're just going to throw their hands up and say "well, we tried—all paper from here on out, folks".

If I had to guess, we'll probably see PDFs and Hero Lab for 5e, maybe very much in the Pathfinder model. There are plenty of good small-scale apps out there, but I can't think of anybody with a proven track record of working closely with a publisher and releasing content in a fashion that's readily monetizable like Lone Wolf. And they've expressed interest in doing it and frustration at the lack of licensing terms, so it's unlikely that their relationship with Paizo would preclude them from doing it.

I can understand why maybe WOTC wouldn't turn to them up front. Hero Lab is, well, a bit utilitarian. It's not pretty and sleek and the programming required to customize it is a bit of a barrier to entry. But it works, and they release content promptly.

So yeah, that's what I expect. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised and they'll just release fair licensing terms to everybody. Who knows?

 

[Nebulous]

So yeah, that's what I expect. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised and they'll just release fair licensing terms to everybody. Who knows?

Here's a pleasant thought: 5th edition D&D turned out better than most of us expected. Maybe they have a digital plan that's also better than most of us expected (?)

 

[Umbran]

Ironically, this is exactly why WotC feels that communicating is a poor option - because there are people who, in the same breath, say that WotC should be completely upfront with fans like him, and that the decision to cancel a software product before launch is an example of dysfunctional management.

The decision to kill a project, in and of itself, is not necessarily dysfunctional.

However, if you have a project that has gotten to the point of needing to be killed, that usually means *something* went wrong.

Thus, the need to take the final, non-dysfunctional step is an indication of some other previous dysfunction.

(This is highly simplified, of course - sometimes crap happens. Actually, in the software world, *often* crap happens.)

 

[MagicSN]

If they didn't feel like they could release the MM and DMG at the same time they released the PH... there's no way in heck they could have built, programmed and debugged an entire fully-edited computer program too. It just wasn't happening. And I realize that now.

It would have been possible. My own Character Builder reached 95% completeness in the meanwhile, and I am just one guy doing this in his freetime (you have to take my word on it as well as on the quality of my character builder, sadly due to licence issues I cannot release it - I am still hoping there will be a nice and open licence in the future).

It is not impossible to do! And an internal guy would have the advantage of knowing in advance "well, maybe implement this class later, there are big changes coming up on it".

 

[billd91]

Here's a pleasant thought: 5th edition D&D turned out better than most of us expected. Maybe they have a digital plan that's also better than most of us expected (?)

If so, it's well camouflaged by being a good fit to our low expectations.