D&D (2024) How D&D Beyond Will Handle Access To 2014 Rules

D&D Beyond has announced how the transition to the new 2024 edition will work on the platform, and how legacy access to the 2014 version of D&D will be implemented.

• You will still be able to access the 2014 Basic Rules and core rulebooks.
• You will still be able to make characters using the 2014 Player's Handbook.
• Existing home-brew content will not be impacted.
• These 2014 rules will be accessible and will be marked with a 'legacy' badge: classes, subclasses, species, backgrounds, feats, monsters.
• Tooltips will reflect the 2024 rules.
• Monster stat blocks will be updated to 2024.
• There will be terminology changes (Heroic Inspiration, Species, etc.)

D&D (2024) - Wizards of the Coast Backtracks on D&D Beyond and 2014 Content

Wizards of the Coast posted an overnight update stating that they are not going forward with previously released plans to require those wishing to use some 2014 content on D&D Beyond to use the Homebrew function to manually enter it. Instead, all the content including spells and magic items will...

www.enworld.org

 

[Micah Sweet]

Something has to have the money, marketing and recognition to draw in a steady stream of new consumers... otherwise your market slowly goes the way of the dodo.

Edit: What ttrpg has the recognition of D&D? What ttrpg draws in new players like D&D does? What other ttrpg has a game of the year videogame based on it?

Explain to me why the gaming industry needs one company to be vastly more powerful and influential than all the others combined, or the industry collapses, when that isn't the case with every industry? Why does the TTRPG market have to have WotC lording over all so very much?

 

[Imaro]

yes, it gave them a headstart. Of course WotC did not give the preview out of the goodness of their hearts, they were working together closely at the time

I never claimed it was out the goodness of their heart, why is irrelevant. They were able to pivot than most and had information given to them by WotC that essentially allowed them to become the second largest fantasy ttrpg company. The point is their success and fortune were due to WotC's actions more than anything else... that's being beholden.

the stronger case is if WotC had not released 3e under the OGL, but that was not the argument you were making.

You said that their fate depends on WotC and if WotC moved to a 6e their player numbers would dwindle as a result, I was pointing out that the opposite could happen just as well and is probably even more likely when we consider past edition changes

How does a hypothetical create a stronger case. I am showing you how WotC's actions took Paizo from being a 3pp with some moderate success to publishing the 2nd most popular fantasy rpg. I'm not arguing that the outcome must be negative... I am arguing whether it's in the direction of good or bad (as many other 3pp of 3.0 materials discovered when the switch to 3.5 happened) They are all beholden to the actions WotC takes.

 

[Imaro]

Explain to me why the gaming industry needs one company to be vastly more powerful and influential than all the others combined, or the industry collapses, when that isn't the case with every industry? Why does the TTRPG market have to have WotC lording over all so very much?

Because no other ttrpg publisher is doing what they do... marketing wise, technology wise, sales wise, etc.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've tried this argument. The hatred is strong. Good luck!

That's just ridiculous. You act like folks would just leave the hobby if WotC isn't hugely successful. They haven't always been, not at these levels. They certainly haven't had a video game of the year based on their game every year, so using BG3 as proof of anything is dubious.

 

[mamba]

The point is their success and fortune were due to WotC's actions more than anything else...

I was never disputing that

How does a hypothetical create a stronger case. I am showing you how WotC's actions took Paizo from being a 3pp with some moderate success to publishing the 2nd most popular fantasy rpg.

I am failing to see the point you are making here, or at a minimum how it relates to my initial reply.

What hypothetical are you talking about, 6e? I was not talking about a new edition, you were. I was using past edition changes to point out that they leave a sizeable number of players behind every time

As to the point I was originally making, you wrote

if WotC had decided to move onto a totally new edition both would have seen a loss of market share

both being A5e and ToV, to which I replied

or a bump, just like Paizo during the shift to 4e

This is all I am talking about, I do no care about WotC enabling PF1, A5e or ToV. Of course they did, none of these would exist without WotC.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But we don't... thats the point. We have one company that has recognition and awareness amongst the masses and everything else.

Edit: And there's no reason to say your idea would be better or worse but I think any ttrpg that wants to succeed at or near the level of D&D is going to need to be a business first.

Who says any gaming company needs to be as powerful as WotC? Where is that assumption coming from? It's not, "WotC power, with everything that entails" or "unprofitable".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because no other ttrpg publisher is doing what they do... marketing wise, technology wise, sales wise, etc.

Again, who cares? None of that is necessary for the industry to exist and make money, certainly not from a single publisher.

 

[Imaro]

Again, who cares? None of that is necessary for the industry to exist and make money, certainly not from a single publisher.

And that's why WotC has the market share it does... because it's the one who cares about these things as do their consumers. You're talking necessity for a recreational hobby... it's not about necessity for the vast majority or they'd still be purchasing staple bound, no art pamphlets.

 

[Imaro]

Who says any gaming company needs to be as powerful as WotC? Where is that assumption coming from? It's not, "WotC power, with everything that entails" or "unprofitable".

This assumption comes from the fact that it's (for all intents and purposes) always been this way, worked out for the industry and, most importantly, no one has been able to do better wiha different model. If the assumption is incorrect why does the situation of WotC having the most marketshare continue? Why hasn't it failed yet?

 

[DinoInDisguise]

That's just ridiculous. You act like folks would just leave the hobby if WotC isn't hugely successful. They haven't always been, not at these levels. They certainly haven't had a video game of the year based on their game every year, so using BG3 as proof of anything is dubious.

We agree on a lot of things. This isn't one.