D&D Beyond Drops are antithetical to D&D Beyond's traditional subscription model

The new service diminishes the traditional value of a subscription, even while adding new content.
1778247644746.png


This week, Wizards of the Coast announced a new feature for D&D Beyond, exclusive to subscribers of the service. Drops are a new weekly feature of the site that will add a smattering of new content, such as spells, feats, or monsters to a new compendium accessible only to subscribers. Included in the initial drop were over 100 maps from previously released editions of the game as well as 250 "reveals", all of which are available through D&D Beyond's Maps VTT.

On the outset, the Drops compendium seems like an easy way to add value to D&D Beyond's subscription service. While Drops continues a trend of "digital exclusive" content to D&D Beyond, the content itself (at least initially) seems rather tame. So far, there's no indication that D&D Beyond will add new subclasses or species to the Drops compendium and the feats and spells they initially added hardly seem like "must-have" spells. However, the implementation of Drops marks a notable shift in how D&D Beyond's subscription service works, and it's for the worse.

Traditionally, the core reason to subscribe to D&D Beyond is to unlock content sharing between accounts. If one player subscribes to D&D Beyond and creates a campaign for players to use, other party members in that campaign can access any content the subscriber has purchased through D&D Beyond. However, content released through Drops are locked behind a subscription - it cannot be shared to other party members. What's more, Drops content is only available to those who have an active subscription. If a user lets their subscription lapse or cancels it, they lose access to the content.

It's unclear whether this was a deliberate move or a quirk of D&D Beyond's now decade-old service, but the rollout of Drops as it is now is a step back for D&D Beyond. Since their acquisition of D&D Beyond back in 2022, Wizards has looked to "extract" value from the service. At first, this came in the form of digital exclusive perks available to anyone with an active D&D Beyond account. Then came additional subscriber perks such as early access to new D&D book releases, or additional "DLC" content exclusive to D&D Beyond. Still, these were all "value adds" - ways to increase the value of a subscription or an active account. Although Drops is supposedly the same, excluding the content from the traditional subscription content sharing service is a major setback to what's supposed to be the core reason to have a subscription in the first place.

It's clear that D&D Beyond is attempting to entice the average player to purchase a D&D Beyond subscription. Previously, the business model encouraged a single player from a D&D game to purchase a Master tier subscription and content and share it with fellow players. However, D&D Beyond Drops explicitly encourages every player in a game to purchase a subscription to gain access to player-facing material that would otherwise be unavailable to them. And while I'm sure there's workarounds such as a DM directly adding the content to a player's character sheet or simply screengrabbing the content and passing it along to players, D&D Beyond Drops still represents a notable shift into how D&D Beyond uses its subscription model.

One of the big worries when Dan Ayoub and other gaming executives took over Wizards of the Coast is that they'd look to shift their core games to a live service model. I'd argue that Dungeons & Dragons has always been a live service game, one that's continuously updated via new content. D&D has even featured a subscription model of sorts in the past - many now core parts of Dungeons & Dragons were first released through Dragon Magazine, which of course was available via a subscription. Of course, when Dragon was released, it was easy enough to pass a copy of a magazine with a new class or new spell to another interested party member, and of course ending a Dragon subscription didn't mean losing access to past magazines. Still, D&D Beyond Drops marks a worrying shift as to how D&D's live service model is changing. Previously, a D&D game needed only to pay $54.99 a year to gain access to any content purchased by a subscriber. Now, every player has to pay a minimum of $25.99 a year if they want access to certain spells or feats. It's a clear way to drum up more revenue for the D&D Beyond service while diminishing the value of D&D Beyond's traditional subscription model.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad

Not sure what exactly this is addressing....but part of my point was that the question was asked with no nuance or conditionals...
The part of your post that I quoted "While you're at it be sure to ask if its officially ok for a purchaser of a WotC PHB to share all copyrighted material inside of the book and accompanying artwork with non-purchasers." ;)
 

So to be clear, you don't think you did anything wrong when you advocated for copying and sharing Drops content?

Mod note:
@Alzrius , in general, we ask that, when users feel someone is doing something wrong, you report it and then disengage, and let the staff handle it.

We do NOT ask you to report it, and then if you don't like the official response (or lack thereof), you continue to pursue it as you see fit.

You've made your feelings on the matter quite clear. Nobody here is going to be aided by your continuing to get in their faces about it. It is past time for you to back off. If you can't, backing off can be arranged for you.
 

Well then, let's seek out a more official answer so that you won't be quite so anxious.

@LaTia J we've seen multiple people here talk about sharing Drops content in D&D Beyond with non-subscribers, and in so doing, said how WotC could have limited users from doing that, but didn't.

Can you clarify if WotC is okay with D&D Beyond subscribers copying and sharing Drops content with non-subscribers as "custom" materials?
I kinda agree with @Imaro , lets not drag them into anything.
 

So you think sharing content that isn't supposed to be shared is okay if you only do it with a few people?
No book for sale is meant to be shared*, but I bet they are.

Except by recognized NPOs, libraries.

Edit: posted from other page, did not see this one yet.
 


Actually, yes. That is the first stage of the enshittification process as codified by Cory Doctorow: you make your service really desirable to get everyone on board and drive them away from your competitors.


So any company that ever makes it's products better for their customers is on the road to enshitification?
 


So any company that ever makes its products better for their customers is on the road to enshitification?
Not at all; however, it is a pattern. Amazon, Netflix, Disney Plus, FaceBook….

These any many more follow the pattern of providing killer apps and then purposely making them worse over time to extract more from you.

Amazon recommendations use to be awesome. I could see recommendations in any category I wanted and they’d be great. Then they destroyed the service with no more choosing your own categories. Prime was awesome, then they bloated it, raised prices, took away 2 day shipping.

DB, you do not even see friends posts now. You get 1-2 in a see of BS algorithms content.

We do not even know if drops will be an improvement. None of my players will sub for it so it becomes a bunch of content I will have. Maps may be ok, but I tend to just use a blank one for combat anyway.

Honestly, I’d rather see resources spent elsewhere but we will see.

No one I know will sub to heroic tier for drops content.
 


Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top