WotC D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.

[Oofta]

Gotta love the conspiracy theories that WotC is evil and will strangle the TTRPG market. Somehow.

Is WotC trying to get additional revenue from their investment in DDB? Of course. I just don't see it causing much doom and gloom.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think the change here is not an "I trusted them" to "I don't". It feels like, most of the time, "I trust that what they think is good for their business is usually good for the hobby" to "I no longer trust that what they think is good for their business is good for the hobby."

I'm somewhere between you and @Parmandur - I don't, and have never, thought that what they think is good for them has anything to do with what is good for the hobby. I've always felt that their judgement is questionable. I do think that if they pull-off something that is good for them (sometimes in spite of themselves), then it will usually be good for the hobby. I don't think it's possible for them to do something that actually succeeds in being good for them but bad for the hobby - or in other words, if they try something that will be bad for the hobby, then it will inevitably turn against them too, no matter how much they think it's a good idea.

Note that when I say "them", I refer to WotC/Hasbro suits - I actually think that those who are closer to the ground have their hearts, and often their heads, in the right place. The suits I would trust to cut off their nose to spite their face, if they thought there was a buck in it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Gotta love the conspiracy theories that WotC is evil and will strangle the TTRPG market. Somehow.

Is WotC trying to get additional revenue from their investment in DDB? Of course. I just don't see it causing much doom and gloom.

Whatever happened to the concept of "a rising tide lifts all boats"? I don't agree with Riggs' "If D&D doesn't dominate, then the TTRPG Golden Age is over", but I DO think that if D&D is doing well, then the whole industry will benefit.

 

[dbolack]

I'm somewhere between you and @Parmandur - I don't, and have never, thought that what they think is good for them has anything to do with what is good for the hobby. I've always felt that their judgement is questionable. I do think that if they pull-off something that is good for them (sometimes in spite of themselves), then it will usually be good for the hobby. I don't think it's possible for them to do something that actually succeeds in being good for them but bad for the hobby - or in other words, if they try something that will be bad for the hobby, then it will inevitably turn against them too, no matter how much they think it's a good idea.

That's fair. And it's not like all of us out here have a unified idea of what's good for the hobby. I don't think you can even get 100 out of a 100 to agree that getting more people in the hobby is a good thing.

 

[Parmandur]

Note that when I say "them", I refer to WotC/Hasbro suits - I actually think that those who are closer to the ground have their hearts, and often their heads, in the right place. The suits I would trust to cut off their nose to spite their face, if they thought there was a buck in it.

That's why I'm somewhat heartened by the new WotC President having a "grok the hottom" background in development...and in D&D, for that matter.

 

[TiQuinn]

Whatever happened to the concept of "a rising tide lifts all boats"? I don't agree with Riggs' "If D&D doesn't dominate, then the TTRPG Golden Age is over", but I DO think that if D&D is doing well, then the whole industry will benefit.

It doesn’t take a soothsayer to see that DDB would allow WotC to have a lot of pricing power with regards to 3PP. The planned OGL had intended to require 3PP to pay a 25% royalty above $750,000, which most publishers who commented on it felt was an onerous non-starter. It doesn’t take much to see that while playing in WotC’s sandbox may lift their boats for a period, it may not stay that way and could prove very painful.

 

[Clint_L]

It doesn’t take a soothsayer to see that DDB would allow WotC to have a lot of pricing power with regards to 3PP. The planned OGL had intended to require 3PP to pay a 25% royalty above $750,000, which most publishers who commented on it felt was an onerous non-starter. It doesn’t take much to see that while playing in WotC’s sandbox may lift their boats for a period, it may not stay that way and could prove very painful.

The people making deals to sell their product on DDB aren't idiots, and they aren't being coerced. They will put their product where they can reach customers, whether that is DDB, Demiplane, Roll20, the FLGS, Amazon, etc.

So they will look at the terms of each deal and decide if it makes sense for them. As will the platform provider. That's business. And if it stops making financial sense, they'll stop using it. When asked, on this forum, whether Level Up would put products on DDB if the option arose, @Morrus replied, "Of course."

This is not really like the OGL situation. That was, in effect, WotC trying to claim ownership over game rules to charge a licensing fee for something that had previously been free.

Whether it is good for the 5e sector of the TTRPG community, specifically, to have this much control in the hands of one company is an open debate and kind of depends on your context. WotC has the inside track because they created the 5e system, own by far the dominant game using it, and have the financial resources of a large corporation. But I don't think there's anything nefarious going on, beyond the normal nefariousness of capitalism, if that's how you see it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's why I'm somewhat heartened by the new WotC President having a "grok the hottom" background in development...and in D&D, for that matter.

Yeah, without knowing him personally, I can only think that he's about as good as we can probably get. He's clearly known of D&D for a loooong time, and possibly played it.

 

[dbolack]

It doesn’t take a soothsayer to see that DDB would allow WotC to have a lot of pricing power with regards to 3PP. The planned OGL had intended to require 3PP to pay a 25% royalty above $750,000, which most publishers who commented on it felt was an onerous non-starter. It doesn’t take much to see that while playing in WotC’s sandbox may lift their boats for a period, it may not stay that way and could prove very painful.

Right, but that cut comes at a very different place with DDB than it would without it.

 

[Clint_L]

Right, but that cut comes at a very different place with DDB than it would without it.

You pay a cut to sell your product at someone else's store, whether that store is a FLGS, Amazon, Roll20, or DnDBeyond. I don't see how WotC expecting a cut is problematic, and clearly the folks entering into these deals have concluded that it makes sense for them, as well. To a person, they seem delighted at the opportunity.

Buying, operating, and expanding DDB is not free, anymore than running a FLGS is free.