Matt Colville weighs in.

[Parmandur]

For all those that are lamenting that he’s being a grognard about kids these days and the hobby.

He’s not talking about the hobby. He’s talking about Dungeons and Dragons.

He’s lamenting that D&D will just be another video game.

Well, but think about it. Even if we we allow a maximal potential future, where D&D Arena totally takes off and becomes the big money maker for D&D, it is important to remember that this already happened to Magic: the Gathering. The digital future has been there for Magic for a couple years now, and Arena income is a huge chunk of Hasbro's overall revenue.

What effect has that had on the physical card game? Looking past the belly-aching from the enfranchised players (M:tG lingo for people who show up to tournaments, care about the story, etc.), it's only been getting bigger with more people playing the physical card game than ever. It's not a zero sum proposal.

 

[lvl20dm]

I certainly see the idea that 4e was meant to be more "MMO" friendly - in that it would lend itself better to an adaptation. But that's not the same thing as changing D&D into an MMO.

Now what their plans are past 1D&D I can't really even guess. It's a wild stretch to take what we've seen in the OGL 1.2, the Playtest, and a few statements to investors and extrapolate that into D&D becoming built around microtransactions. Now, this new VTT having a microtransaction economy wouldn't surprise me. But it's not really going to change D&D to a video game as long as they are publishing rulebooks.

 

[Clint_L]

I thought the same thing about folks saying WotC was trying to end all OGL 1.0(a).

I really did.

Being wrong about one thing does not logically extend to a totally different situation.

You were wrong about a corporate strategy. He is wrong about human nature. Kids are not idiots. They understand the difference between a TTRPG and Fortnite. 5e exploded in popularity among young folks while MMORPGs and a zillion other online options were available to them.

The reason I sponsor D&D Club is precisely because it helps kids connect with each other, and it engages their imaginative and creative energies. And that's what they love about it as well. And they all prefer playing in person, but they also go online when circumstances require (e.g. during vacation). This is a good thing - online D&D is miles better than no D&D!

 

[darjr]

Being wrong about one thing does not logically extend to a totally different situation.

You were wrong about a corporate strategy. He is wrong about human nature. Kids are not idiots. They understand the difference between a TTRPG and Fortnite. 5e exploded in popularity among young folks while MMORPGs and a zillion other online options were available to them.

The reason I sponsor D&D Club is precisely because it helps kids connect with each other, and it engages their imaginative and creative energies. And that's what they love about it as well. And they all prefer playing in person, but they also go online when circumstances require (e.g. during vacation). This is a good thing - online D&D is miles better than no D&D!

He didn’t say kids were idiots.

Cheese and crackers folks!

 

[Vaalingrade]

He has all the right in the world to feel the way he feels and say whatever he wants.

But.

We don't need this. This defeatism. This concern for the IP of 'Dungeons and Dragons' more than the hobby and game we love. This railing against videogames like the stereotype we should all ignore. The complaining that 'they're doing something to D&D I don't like' stuff that's been going on for long than I've been playing. Or alive.

It's a distraction from the real problem. It's just another thing to paint opposition to what WotC is doing as general puerile fan rage but people afraid of change instead of very pertinent and grounded concern for the fate of a huge chunk of the industry. Especially someone who is considered a thought leader.

Feel what you feel. Vent how you vent. Give up if that's what you want to do.

But not helpful.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I thought the same thing about folks saying WotC was trying to end all OGL 1.0(a).

I really did.

This is what has really given me pause through the whole thing. People were utterly disbelieving this was even possible when the rumors started, and even when the leak happened folks were convinced the leak was fake both because the language in the leak was a little odd due to the comments included in them (as well as some strange grammatical and punctuation choices) and because the idea that it was even possible to deauthorize the OGL seemed ludicrous. But we came to see that WOTC was dead set on deauthorizing the OGL and that the leak was genuine. I think we do really need to open our imaginations to worst case scenarios. This is a huge corporation with resources no one else in the industry comes close to. And while their PR efforts initially failed spectacularly, with each attempt they appear to be finding better and better footing (they still are facing a lot of opposition but I am also seeing plenty of people who have bought into their PR over this).

I will say something like this happened before: TSR went under, we didn't know if D&D was even going to be a thing. Then WOTC resurrected it, but it was very much a reboot of the brand. D&D is synonymous with fantasy RPGs, it isn't inconceivable that after this, though they likely won't be using the D&D name because that belongs to Hasbro now, a company with deeper roots in the actual hobby will be able to position an RPG to replace D&D and eventually that could become synonymous with fantasy table top roleplaying. All Hasbro really has is a name. They also have a system, but alternative systems that achieve all the same basic things, maybe even do it better than D&D, are possible and won't impinge on D&D's IP.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Being wrong about one thing does not logically extend to a totally different situation.

I agree it doesn't. You can't use one event to fully predict another. But it should inject some caution into the conversation and make people a little less likely to dismiss concerns. What I learned from how wrong people were is that the consensus about a thing in the hobby can be way off, people who seem to know what they are talking about, can also be way off. We shouldn't assume this thing is going to go one way or another but we should be a little more imaginative when it comes to speculating on where this is going, and not get comfortable in our conclusions.

 

[mamba]

I certainly see the idea that 4e was meant to be more "MMO" friendly - in that it would lend itself better to an adaptation. But that's not the same thing as changing D&D into an MMO.

no, not turn it into, but the direction of making it more like one seems pretty clear

 

[TheSword]

I’m confused by the hyperbole…

Did WotC indicate they weren’t releasing hard back books at some point in the last three weeks and I missed it?

Is there any indication that a 3D VTT will be the only way WotC will allow you to play D&D on their platform. That there won’t be 2D alternatives similar to Roll20 etc but integrated with D&D Beyond with normal jpeg maps and tokens?

Is there any evidence that Roll20 won’t continue to make licensed D&D works paying WotC a share of proceeds like they do now?

I’m a grognard and player of 30 years and I love playing on VTT - even when face to face. I already pay $10 a month for a Roll 20 subscription so what does it matter if I pay Roll20 or D&D Beyond. It might make my life a lot easier if it’s integrated.

Paraphrasing his video…

I expected more from Matt C

 

[Incenjucar]

D&D is just one of a million ways people roleplay. WotC can break their brand, but they're not going to break RPGs. There's probably a bunch of kids LARPing in VR Chat as I type this.