D&D Beyond Cancellations Changed WotCs Plans

Gizmodo has revealed that the partial OGL v1.1 walkback yesterday was in response to the fan campaign to cancel D&D Beyond subscriptions, with "five digits" worth of cancellations. However, the site also reveals that management at the company believed that fans were overreating and that it would all be forgotten in a few months.

In order to delete a D&D Beyond account entirely, users are funneled into a support system that asks them to submit tickets to be handled by customer service: Sources from inside Wizards of the Coast confirm that earlier this week there were “five digits” worth of complaining tickets in the system. Both moderation and internal management of the issues have been “a mess,” they said, partially due to the fact that WotC has recently downsized the D&D Beyond support team.

Yesterday's walkback removed the royalties from the license, but still 'de-authorized' the OGL v1.0a, something which may or may not be legally possible, depending on who you ask.

Cancelled D&D Beyond Subscriptions Forced Hasbro's Hand

Swift consumer action prompted Dungeons & Dragons publisher Wizards of the Coast to to scrap licensing updates. The players aren't done yet.

gizmodo.com

 

[raniE]

That sounds a lot more a lifestyle issue than anything else. I don't mean that in a mean way, but most people have periods in their lives when the practical difficulties of organising RPGs are more or less significant.

On the other hand, I've never seen an edition change wipe out a group. Either they go with the new edition or they don't, tends to be the reaction. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I don't think it's common. Similarly with RPG changes - the only times I've seen those go wrong are when the DM is the only person who wants to change, and he wants to change to something totally different in style and clunk-as-heck in mechanics.

I do think 5E will lose some people over time (more with this idiocy disenchanting people re: D&D), because the huge bulk of 5E's players are in 15-29 age range, which is the easiest range to play D&D in until you get into what, your mid-40s or later? As more and more of those people hit their 30s, where they're having to deal with kids and so on, but where those kids are far too young to play RPGs with, I think there will be a dip.

I’ve seen lots of things wipe gaming groups, and almost every time, some of the members didn’t come back, at least not for a time. There’s always other things to do, you have to really prioritize RPGs to play them, and that calculation can change in an instant when something changes, like a certain person leaving the game, getting news that WorC is evil etc. I think the edition change will have a larger impact on D&D this time because a lot of the new players don’t expect it and won’t know how to roll with it, but more importantly because of the emphasis on online tools. If it’s all “wait, we play with D&D Beyond and now it’s saying I need to buy this new book to play, what the hell?” Then yeah, that’s going to lose some players. People who play at a table with books? Less affected by far. And people who just don’t want to play D&D anymore because of the current issues can just walk away, especially if they were never die-hards.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I’ve seen lots of things wipe gaming groups, and almost every time, some of the members didn’t come back, at least not for a time.

To me, anything were even some of the people come back, even if it takes a while, isn't a TPK, y'know?

If it’s all “wait, we play with D&D Beyond and now it’s saying I need to buy this new book to play, what the hell?”

????

Have you not used Beyond? You're describing an impossible situation, essentially. If you're using Beyond, the only person who "needs" the new PHB is the DM, because you share it with the players, and the DM will probably have bought a number of books on Beyond. It's literally like you own the book on Beyond, if it's shared with you - it's actually genuinely hard to work out what's shared and what you actually own, at times lol.

It's real-world players who might actually need to buy another book themselves.

People who play at a table with books? Less affected by far.

That literally doesn't make any sense. I can only assume you don't use Beyond, or your DM is really weird has intentionally turned off content sharing.

 

[deganawida]

I've been speaking with a friend of mine, who cancelled his master tier account over this.

One thing that he keeps circling back to is that this is all about the VTT, but not in the way that I think has been expressed here.

He argues that the lockdown on 3PP is aimed at the future of the VTT, as well as the restriction on content.

His two main points:

First, that Hasbro will not want 3PP producing virtual minis or animations for DDB. He specifically mentioned CR here; could you imagine how much money Matt Mercer could make by providing voice sets for DDB minis?

Second, that Hasbro has the morality clause in order to head off ERP and bad-acting in the VTT. He pointed out to me that porn is a very successful industry, and that there is a contingent of bard players who try to seduce anything and everything as a lark (what my wife calls, "Brothels & Bards"), and that Hasbro is looking forward in order to cut that off at the pass.

What is interesting about these two points to me is that the show a future path where all play is moderated via DDB and held there, where D&D goes from being a toolkit to play with your friends, to a virtual experience with content moderation and delivery. DM-as-service could be a real thing, if his conclusions are correct, and matchmaking would soon follow, akin to online shooters.

If that is the case, and I am not saying that it is, then "Dungeons & Dragons" as we have known it and played it is truly dead. What we will have left is something more akin to MtG Arena (or whatever that video game I tried out on Steam 8 years ago was), and creative problem solving in games will be diminished due to not being programmed in DDB's VTT.

Again, I am not saying that is the case, but he made a compelling argument and presented things to me which I had not considered, which is a very long-term view of Hasbro migrating to a complete live-service model of D&D.

 

[Ibrandul]

I've been speaking with a friend of mine, who cancelled his master tier account over this.

One thing that he keeps circling back to is that this is all about the VTT, but not in the way that I think has been expressed here.

He argues that the lockdown on 3PP is aimed at the future of the VTT, as well as the restriction on content.

His two main points:

First, that Hasbro will not want 3PP producing virtual minis or animations for DDB. He specifically mentioned CR here; could you imagine how much money Matt Mercer could make by providing voice sets for DDB minis?

Second, that Hasbro has the morality clause in order to head off ERP and bad-acting in the VTT. He pointed out to me that porn is a very successful industry, and that there is a contingent of bard players who try to seduce anything and everything as a lark (what my wife calls, "Brothels & Bards"), and that Hasbro is looking forward in order to cut that off at the pass.

What is interesting about these two points to me is that the show a future path where all play is moderated via DDB and held there, where D&D goes from being a toolkit to play with your friends, to a virtual experience with content moderation and delivery. DM-as-service could be a real thing, if his conclusions are correct, and matchmaking would soon follow, akin to online shooters.

If that is the case, and I am not saying that it is, then "Dungeons & Dragons" as we have known it and played it is truly dead. What we will have left is something more akin to MtG Arena (or whatever that video game I tried out on Steam 8 years ago was), and creative problem solving in games will be diminished due to not being programmed in DDB's VTT.

Again, I am not saying that is the case, but he made a compelling argument and presented things to me which I had not considered, which is a very long-term view of Hasbro migrating to a complete live-service model of D&D.

I think this is all entirely correct but isn't really impacted by the OGL at all. Once Hasbro's VTT is running they can set whatever terms they like for what's allowed on it without bringing the OGL into it. If that weren't the case, they never would have promised (in their statement on Friday) that VTT-uses would remain unaffected by the OGL update.

But this is partly about VTTs, I think: their statement doesn't say VTTs will remain unaffected, only VTT-uses.

So they're promising not to limit what you can do on a VTT via the OGL—but they will try to go after VTT platforms themselves that run D&D natively without signing on to OGL 2.0. Most (not all) of the major VTTs have struck individual agreements with WotC, but none of these is likely to ever be renewed once WotC's VTT is active.

 

[Composer99]

I've been speaking with a friend of mine, who cancelled his master tier account over this.

One thing that he keeps circling back to is that this is all about the VTT, but not in the way that I think has been expressed here.

He argues that the lockdown on 3PP is aimed at the future of the VTT, as well as the restriction on content.

His two main points:

First, that Hasbro will not want 3PP producing virtual minis or animations for DDB. He specifically mentioned CR here; could you imagine how much money Matt Mercer could make by providing voice sets for DDB minis?

Second, that Hasbro has the morality clause in order to head off ERP and bad-acting in the VTT. He pointed out to me that porn is a very successful industry, and that there is a contingent of bard players who try to seduce anything and everything as a lark (what my wife calls, "Brothels & Bards"), and that Hasbro is looking forward in order to cut that off at the pass.

What is interesting about these two points to me is that the show a future path where all play is moderated via DDB and held there, where D&D goes from being a toolkit to play with your friends, to a virtual experience with content moderation and delivery. DM-as-service could be a real thing, if his conclusions are correct, and matchmaking would soon follow, akin to online shooters.

If that is the case, and I am not saying that it is, then "Dungeons & Dragons" as we have known it and played it is truly dead. What we will have left is something more akin to MtG Arena (or whatever that video game I tried out on Steam 8 years ago was), and creative problem solving in games will be diminished due to not being programmed in DDB's VTT.

Again, I am not saying that is the case, but he made a compelling argument and presented things to me which I had not considered, which is a very long-term view of Hasbro migrating to a complete live-service model of D&D.

I think the reason that angle hasn't come up much in discussion here is because controlling prospective 3pp or homebrew content on the VTT doesn't require trying to de-authorise the OGL, it just requires that users and 3pps accept a different licence - not unlike the terms for posting content on DMs Guild.

 

[Nikosandros]

I think the reason that angle hasn't come up much in discussion here is because controlling prospective 3pp or homebrew content on the VTT doesn't require trying to de-authorise the OGL, it just requires that users and 3pps accept a different licence - not unlike the terms for posting content on DMs Guild.

Yes, they can wall-off their new VTT as much as they like, but leave the OGL 1.0 alone!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The fact that this red herring has derailed so many discussions about WotC's de facto licence-grab shows that it was clearly a good point with which to disguise their non-retraction.

I wish this thought process would go away. I don't care WHY they do things. If they stop people from making a D&D/3pp/D20 G* word book I am happy. If they stop people from making a D&D/3pp/D20 'final solution' source book I am happy.

May it be they did 1 thing good so they could 'hide' 7 wrong... sure, but the fact that when people say "THIS 1 thing is good" people act like they are saying all of the things are and fight against it is insane.

I also feel like saying things like "I don't understand why you are for no hate speech" is pretty gas lilting

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think some certainly are. D&D group collapses because some people say “I’m not playing any Hasbro stuff” and someone else says “I don’t want to learn another game”

Very skeptical.

People tend to drop out of D&D or RPGs due to life/lifestyle changes, not because someone didn't want to play a specific game.

if groups do break up there is at least a chance that it breaks into 2 groups... it still messes up friendsips

 

[raniE]

To me, anything were even some of the people come back, even if it takes a while, isn't a TPK, y'know?

????

Have you not used Beyond? You're describing an impossible situation, essentially. If you're using Beyond, the only person who "needs" the new PHB is the DM, because you share it with the players, and the DM will probably have bought a number of books on Beyond. It's literally like you own the book on Beyond, if it's shared with you - it's actually genuinely hard to work out what's shared and what you actually own, at times lol.

Which only applies to 5e stuff. Suddenly it’s new edition time and WotC are, as is obvious, complete morons so suddenly you need to upgrade to the new edition book to play. Sure, only one person needs to buy the new books, but that one person still has to do it.

It's real-world players who might actually need to buy another book themselves.

Only if they actually want to switch to the new game. Not switching a physical game is going to be much easier than not switching to the new edition on WotC’s official platform.

That literally doesn't make any sense. I can only assume you don't use Beyond, or your DM is really weird has intentionally turned off content sharing.

Of course it does. The GM is still a player, and now they have to purchase a bunch of new stuff.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Which only applies to 5e stuff. Suddenly it’s new edition time and WotC are, as is obvious, complete morons so suddenly you need to upgrade to the new edition book to play. Sure, only one person needs to buy the new books, but that one person still has to do it.

I don't think that's a real issue, and more to the point, it's definitely less of an issue for Beyond people than physical people.

Only if they actually want to switch to the new game. Not switching a physical game is going to be much easier than not switching to the new edition on WotC’s official platform.

This seems like retcon lol and doesn't really make sense with what you're arguing.

Of course it does. The GM is still a player, and now they have to purchase a bunch of new stuff.

I don't think people are going to balk hugely at buying new books that they've had essentially a 2-year warning about and that they aren't hard-required to buy. It's not like Beyond is just going to lock you out because you don't have 1D&D.