WotC Roll for Combat got to try the 3D vtt and he seems to like it. Live streaming now.

[Clint_L]

I can chalk it up to him having a post-convention excitement about a new product. I've been there before.
Without him being completely nefarious, I can chalk it up to him doing a "reverse clickbait" to get views by being positive about a new product.
Still, I dislike DND Beyond and its UI. I am extremely worried as a fan of Battlezoo and their content on Foundry that if Glicker signs up with WotC that I may not get future content from them. And that may mean they stop producing for Pathfinder.
All this is a step-by-step severing of my ability to interact with the hobby. I get that. I understand that this means we rent content on monthly fees. That we lose control of our games. I understand all this.ut
I just hate to see it happening. And people being happy about it.

It seems pretty lousy to assume dishonesty on Glicker's part because he doesn't share your cynicism about this particular product. Is it not even possible that he just thinks it's really good? You are second guessing his motives and you have no idea what you are talking about. You haven't even seen the VTT he is discussing! It could be amazing, for all you know!

It seems like you've already made up your mind, and there is no evidence that can persuade you otherwise, to the extent that you are impugning Glicker's character. But if you're not open to the possibility of being wrong, then what is the point of even being in the discussion? To just vent and accuse people of lying?

I'm kind of skeptical about the VTT myself. I'm not really a VTT kind of guy - I'm super passionate about miniatures-based play, and I'm not great with tech. So I'm not really the target audience for this. On the other hand, I can't drag tons of Dwarven Forge to school with me for all those games (I've tried; it's heavy and my back ain't what it used to be), and if this interface is as intuitive as he describes - and that seems to be what sets it apart from systems such as Forge and Roll20 in Glicker's view - then maybe there is something for me here. I won't know until I see it. But I appreciate him sharing his perspective, and I am not going to doubt Glicker's honesty just because I didn't expect his enthusiasm.

 

[Clint_L]

You don't need a Sub for Beyond.

You do to use the maps feature. And I am sure you will need one to use the VTT. And I am 100% fine with that. Do we expect them to give it away? DnDBeyond cost them $146 million, plus everything they've since put into it, plus the cost of maintaining it, and the VTT will probably cost that much again.

I pay 6 bucks a month to share unlimited access to basically all of D&D plus several 3PP, and more to come, with about twenty people. I can make and run encounters in a fraction of the time. My players, many of whom are beginners, can access everything they need from an intuitive character sheet. It even has dice, which almost all of the students prefer to using physical dice, and means that all of my students are playing D&D 100% for free.

For free! WotC even gifted our club a copy of all the books up to Rime of the Frost Maiden!

Going to a movie, by myself, is almost twenty bucks, for around two hours of entertainment.You don't want to know what I spend on Dwarven Forge. I just spent more on a Reaper mini-Kickstarter than I will in two years on my DDB sub. My DnDBeyond subscription is the best value going. Pennies for each hour of entertainment.

 

[Hussar]

Or, maybe they liked what they saw...?

You’re doing it wrong. Once you’ve declared something you must never, ever hold a different opinion. You must close your mind.

 

[Oofta]

I don't even use Maps on Beyond because I don't want to have to set up a Campaign.

I just want to pick a Map, pick some PC icons, Pick some Monster Icons, plop 'em all down and move 'em around with a mouse. Give me something that can do THAT and I'm IN.

An example Stephen gave was a forest encounter. He used a randomizer function for trees, added a path, some bodies and a trail along with monsters. Said it took about 2 minutes to make.

For him, it wasn't much different than setting up a quick tabletop. Of course if you want something more complex you'll be able to purchase them. I could probably get away with a dozen or so maps myself.

 

[EpicureanDM]

My cynical take is that Glicker's rapid transformation in perspective about the VTT and all-in with the 2024 revision is that he wants to get Battlezoo products on DND Beyond, so he's pandering to the WotC suits.
The stuff he's bragging about - literally, it's been available for close to a decade on Roll20 and for years on Foundry. And he knows this as a developer. The one thing that those services don't have is Hasbro money behind it (and the built-in Beyond fanbase).
So I think it's a calculated move to help his business.

Roll for Combat cultivated that fanbase. They were extremely anti-WotC even as recent as a week ago. Watching them bash WotC was a favorite past-time of mine. There's not many online spaces I can go where I can even speak critically of 5e because WotC is so beloved in the industry (despite all their missteps this year.) There's a lot of reasons we should be able to be critical.
To completely 180 and gush about how much he loves the company - it doesn't feel authentic at all.

I feel the same way. To gloss over Roll For Combat's brand of outrage farming because you want the D&D team to succeed is shortsighted.

It should be clear to everyone who paid attention during the OGL disaster that someone inside the D&D team was feeding information to Roll For Combat. Now that someone's trying to cultivate their relationship with RFC and their audience to get some PR juice for the tabletop. Given Chris Cao's prominence in RFC's video, he's arguably the clubhouse leader as the inside source. The D&DB team can see their bonuses evaporating thanks to whatever the D&D book team is doing and they're trying to do something to generate positive buzz. Unfortunately, the only PR tools they've got to hand are the YouTube click-baiters they wielded during the OGL self-immolation.

 

[Retreater]

You don't need a Sub for Beyond.

The popular theory is that you will to use the VTT.

 

[Reynard]

The popular theory is that you will to use the VTT.

WotC wants as many people as possible in their Beyond ecosystem, with the hope that some significant portion of them subscribe and buy products via Beyond. Offering the two different VTT options (Maps for simplicity, the 3D one for glitz) is a smart move, as is inviting popular 3PP into Beyond. I think it is a valid concern to worry about how their license agreements with other VTTs will change as Beyond becomes more and more VTT capable, but it is also possible that the value of those existing agreements remains high (WotC keeps good will, they still make some money from them, and so on). Whether it remains valuable to the VTT companies is another issue. If people flee Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds for the Beyond VTTs, does it make sense to keep paying for the license? only those folks know what point it would no longer be viable for them.

In the end, WotC has a responsibility to Hasbro shareholders and so their choices are going to be driven by ever increasing revenues. Companies that don't have shareholders are going to make different choices based on different pressures.

 

[bedir than]

The D&DB team can see their bonuses evaporating thanks to whatever the D&D book team is doing

Sales of the RPG were up last quarter, without releasing new product

 

[Oofta]

I feel the same way. To gloss over Roll For Combat's brand of outrage farming because you want the D&D team to succeed is shortsighted.

It should be clear to everyone who paid attention during the OGL disaster that someone inside the D&D team was feeding information to Roll For Combat. Now that someone's trying to cultivate their relationship with RFC and their audience to get some PR juice for the tabletop. Given Chris Cao's prominence in RFC's video, he's arguably the clubhouse leader as the inside source. The D&DB team can see their bonuses evaporating thanks to whatever the D&D book team is doing and they're trying to do something to generate positive buzz. Unfortunately, the only PR tools they've got to hand are the YouTube click-baiters they wielded during the OGL self-immolation.

Or ... maybe they just liked the tool and it's implementation. Some of the worst possibilities of WOTC trying to turn D&D into a video game (which I always thought was overblown in any case) are not going to happen. Radical concept I know, that they can acknowledge that a corporation (eek!) could make something they might actually like.

The people behind the VTT sounded excited and would like to see it set up so it could be used for any game. The decisions made by some lawyer (their words) on the OGL do not reflect on all the people actually working on the project.

Bah, what am I talking about. Resume the standard WOTC bashing.

 

[MockingBird]

Yea there are a group of very anti WotC anti 5e folks and they are not very polite about it.

Yeah I don't get it. There seems to be a small group waiting for the down fall of D&D. The fact that RFC was pretty positive about this has me more interested. I'm likely to take their experience and place more value on it because it genuinely seemed like they were being honest and not just hating on it.