WotC Anybody a little worried about how useful their paid VTT library will be in a year+?

[bostonmyk]

Hi All

Is anybody else looking at their existing WOTC materials in R20 and wondering-maybe dreading- its usefulness in the next year or two? Guild linkage is encouraging but I haven't seen much from either company on this. It is a little alarming and definitely makes me think twice about buying anything through the R20 store. Anybody see anything through the murk?

Mike- Eggs-in-1-basket guy.

 

[CleverNickName]

Nah. My library isn't going anywhere.

The questions raised by the new OGL have more to do with whether or not the next edition will be available on my current VTT platform. And that's really only a concern if I want to switch to the next edition (and want it so much that I'm willing to also change VTT platforms.)

 

[Retreater]

I'm not worried. Even if (big "if") it goes away, I feel I got my money's worth out of it from all the games I ran. I try to not collect things on VTT that I don't plan on using in a game soon. (PDFs and physical are a different story.)

 

[Stormonu]

on the VTT side, no.

I am a little concerned when the reissued books come out what will be changed with Beyond pricing and access to what I've purchased as far as character building goes. That they kept access to legacy content in Volo's & Mord's has me hopeful I'll still be able to access/run/update my PCs stored there.

At worst, it's back to paper, or maybe spreadsheets. Won't have an impact on VTT, though.

 

[Clint_L]

I'm a little worried that the WotC VTT will be so good and easy to use that I will be less and less inclined to use my physical miniatures and terrain. And I have a LOT invested in those.

It's not an idle fear: this already happened when I went from primarily 2d terrain to 3d terrain, and hundreds of dollars of 2d stuff got donated to my D&D Club. Now I am into 3d terrain for exponentially more dollars.

 

[cbwjm]

From the FAQ on dndbeyond, it sounds like anyone with a custom agreement with WotC already in place will be able to keep chugging along without issue, so things should be fine with roll20.

 

[tetrasodium]

No, I don't use roll20

 

[Steel_Wind]

Hi All

Is anybody else looking at their existing WOTC materials in R20 and wondering-maybe dreading- its usefulness in the next year or two? Guild linkage is encouraging but I haven't seen much from either company on this. It is a little alarming and definitely makes me think twice about buying anything through the R20 store. Anybody see anything through the murk?

Mike- Eggs-in-1-basket guy.

Nope. I have never paid a nickel towards VTT specific rules. I run Foundry (prior to that, it was D20 Pro).
These are comments not directed at "VTT libraries", but to Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

From the FAQ on dndbeyond, it sounds like anyone with a custom agreement with WotC already in place will be able to keep chugging along without issue, so things should be fine with roll20.

For the current edition. There's no particular indication either way as to whether 1D&D will go on to Roll20/FG.

 

[cbwjm]

For the current edition. There's no particular indication either way as to whether 1D&D will go on to Roll20/FG.

From the FAQ, it sounds like it isn't going to be an issue. Sure, we'll have to wait and see, but I think people are worried over nothing.

 

[tetrasodium]

Came across this interesting blog post about the whole ogl 1.1 thing with a somewhat different pov from most of the coverage so far that really highlights some issues with what wotc seems to be trying for that I haven't seen much mention of. Also given the thread's topic it's interesting to note that wotc talking about "The top VTT platforms" already having custom agreements looking like a rather creative bit of P-hacking or similar .

What does OGL v1.1 mean for VTTs?

A recent draft of OGL v1.1 has been released. Our very own founder and Tech Wizard Nathan breaks down what this means for the future of VTTs.

arkenforge.com

 

[Ruin Explorer]

P-hacking

That is a really wild use of that term. Not critiquing it, but I had to think about it pretty hard to see why you were using it. I'd just have said "disingenuous" myself lol.

But I certainly agree. It seems like WotC has agreements with Roll 20 and Fantasy Ground and that's it.

 

[tetrasodium]

That is a really wild use of that term. Not critiquing it, but I had to think about it pretty hard to see why you were using it. I'd just have said "disingenuous" myself lol.

But I certainly agree. It seems like WotC has agreements with Roll 20 and Fantasy Ground and that's it.

I think I actually started typing that at first but decided to shift it because of the whole "never assume malice when incompetence/stupidity" of Hanlon's razor thing. Get enough different departments involved in a statement and it only takes so long before someone is making references they never had any reason to understand.

Edit: taking things another step it's a useful metric to show how the statement is disingenuous even while it might be "objectively" true under a filter of p-hacking.

​

 

[bostonmyk]

Came across this interesting blog post about the whole ogl 1.1 thing with a somewhat different pov from most of the coverage so far that really highlights some issues with what wotc seems to be trying for that I haven't seen much mention of. Also given the thread's topic it's interesting to note that wotc talking about "The top VTT platforms" already having custom agreements looking like a rather creative bit of P-hacking or similar .

https://arkenforge.com/what-does-ogl-v1-1-mean-for-vtts/[

Thank you. That definitely does clear things up a bit. Obviously, this is an inconvenience for some of us, but definitely more for those whose livelihood depends on it. Man, what a mess

 

[jgsugden]

I never spent a dime on content for my chpoice of VTT, Roll 20. I saw no need. I spent some $ on the access to the advabced features, and I received some free content ... but never spent a dime on content and have made great use of the platform without it.

 

[el-remmen]

I'm a little worried that the WotC VTT will be so good and easy to use that I will be less and less inclined to use my physical miniatures and terrain. And I have a LOT invested in those.

It's not an idle fear: this already happened when I went from primarily 2d terrain to 3d terrain, and hundreds of dollars of 2d stuff got donated to my D&D Club. Now I am into 3d terrain for exponentially more dollars.

I probably don't have as much as it sounds like you have, but I make use of all of mine by playing over Zoom and using a camera pointed at the table. I use Owlbear Rodeo and a scanned map for "exploration/TotM" mode and then set up the scene with minis and terrain when a fight breaks out.

 

[Jagga Spikes]

I sold all of my 5e books. If I ever run it again, free Basic will do. As for VTTs, I have a backlog of non-D&D that will last me lifetime.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I bought the Curse of Strahd Adventure on Roll20, and was planing on buying more but I have frozen all purchases until I shape up 1D&D

 

[bostonmyk]

I never spent a dime on content for my chpoice of VTT, Roll 20. I saw no need. I spent some $ on the access to the advabced features, and I received some free content ... but never spent a dime on content and have made great use of the platform without it.

It is always about saving time for me rather than any specific brand loyalty. Buying integrated assets (character builder, monster manuals) lets me focus on playing than typing/coding/drawing etc.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I use FantasyGrounds and was keen on One D&D but will adapt a wait and see. I think I will continue to use FGU, they have made it a lot easier to copy and paste material in and if they continue that and add the ability to do dice macro in the effects they would go a long way to make users independent on rule specific implementations of the core rpg rules.
I think that perhaps aside from the upcoming PHB may look more to third parties for adventure support and monsters. I am in a wait and see how things pan out.