D&D (2024) How will WOTC monetize One D&D?

[FrogReaver]

I believe they offer a monthly subscription for all D&D One / 5e content. This will be low 5-10 dollars and works out monetarily because they are getting every member of the group to pay instead of just the DM buying the new books. Approximately 1 60 dollar book per year for a group of 5 vs 25/m (assuming 5/m price point) -> 300/y for a group of 5. They would offer a 1 month free trial. This gives new players ease of entry as they have limited investment to start playing with access to all the same content as everyone else. This hopefully helps grow the player base while also increasing revenue per player.

They can still keep their physical book business as the VTT subscription works great as a supplement instead of straight competition/replacement to physical book sales. Some groups may use it as that but they make more off the subscription model than the print model in this scenario so that likely isn't a concern. Also, if the character building and leveling tools work well I can see some players from in person groups subscribing just for the character building options - especially if they make it easy to print a physical character sheet from Beyond.

They can also do microtransactions for skins/mini's/tokens/possibly VTT enhancements/etc.

In short I think this is more likely to be their monetization model rather than what we see on current VTT's where the DM buys the book and shares it with the group.

 

[Retreater]

If it's like the 4e model, they'd want it per player - but honestly we all shared a DDI account (or at least had the DM print our character sheets).
And just like 4e DDI, it will end as soon as Wizards drops the game, games worthless, and it becomes a dead system.

 

[FrogReaver]

If it's like the 4e model, they'd want it per player - but honestly we all shared a DDI account (or at least had the DM print our character sheets).
And just like 4e DDI, it will end as soon as Wizards drops the game, games worthless, and it becomes a dead system.

Wasn't 4e mostly just character creation tools. D&D One VTT will allow to play the game online, likely fairly streamlined.

Honestly, if they already created all the content for that edition no need to remove it, just keep access to it with the subscription and add the new game edition to the subscription model. ez pz. Or charge a higher tier subscription that includes both old and new stuff. Either way, likely no real reason to get rid of it.

 

[Minigiant]

The VTT will just charge you for outside the base aspects for models.

Your Tabaxi glaive echo knight fighter will cost 5 bucks each for the tabaxi head, snow leapard skin, glaive weapon, cape, and echo effect.
Then if you want to import that to the MMO and tactics game, that $25 dollars each unless you have DNDB Premium.

No one will laugh at human longsword fighters ever again.

 

[mellored]

Sounded to me like if you bought the book, you get the digital version as well.

The cost of running a VTT server not as high as it was when 4e was out. All the graphics are probably client side, and based on minis that already have models for. So your not looking at much to keep it running.

Thus I imagine you get the basic game for free (i.e. 4 classes with 1 sub-class each), including VTT with very limited assets. "Free to play" as it is. But then you need to buy the books (and minis?) to get the rest. If you want to play the storm cleric, you need to buy the PHB. If you want Strahd stats block and maps, you need to but Strahd.

As for how that is shared amongst players, harder to say. But I expect an option where anyone in a campaign can share their assets with anyone else in the same campaign. Same as anyone can physically share books at the same table.

Not really any different from now.

Though expect more options, sub classes, magic items, spread out in different books though.

 

[Morrus]

They'll be monetising the brand. Toys, t-shirts, lunch boxes, cartoons, books, that sort of thing.

 

[Lojaan]

Merchandise

 

[Retreater]

It's not just merchandise. Their CEO said she wants "the type of recurrent spending you see in digital games."
That quote is not referencing lunch boxes and t-shirts. It's things like new avatar skins, subscribing to a season pass to access new maps and tracks. It's Playstation Plus or a WoW subscription. It could be microtransactions for random loot boxes.
When I hear their goal to make players (not just DMs) pay more that suggests that they will end DM's sharing content on DND Beyond.
I know I tend towards being pessimistic, but you have to look at what was said. These theories have been posited by some big outlets. To date WotC has said nothing to ease these concerns - which is risking enthusiasm for the brand. Based on my prior experience with other companies - these concerns are probably true. WotC hasn't made another statement because they haven't prepared another financial model to back away from this plan (or they don't plan to).
If it were as simple as "no, no, we're just selling merchandise" we'd have already heard that clarification officially.

 

[aco175]

I would pay a $10.00/month fee if the DDB site had a Dragon and Dungeon magazine-type-thing come with it. Right now, we would not be playing anything digital unless I wanted to play away from my home game.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It's not just merchandise. Their CEO said she wants "the type of recurrent spending you see in digital games."
That quote is not referencing lunch boxes and t-shirts. It's things like new avatar skins, subscribing to a season pass to access new maps and tracks. It's Playstation Plus or a WoW subscription. It could be microtransactions for random loot boxes.
When I hear their goal to make players (not just DMs) pay more that suggests that they will end DM's sharing content on DND Beyond.
I know I tend towards being pessimistic, but you have to look at what was said. These theories have been posited by some big outlets. To date WotC has said nothing to ease these concerns - which is risking enthusiasm for the brand. Based on my prior experience with other companies - these concerns are probably true. WotC hasn't made another statement because they haven't prepared another financial model to back away from this plan (or they don't plan to).
If it were as simple as "no, no, we're just selling merchandise" we'd have already heard that clarification officially.

Marked as pure speculation.