NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9410807" data-attributes="member: 8461">Bear in mind the tenor you're taking here the next time you get mad about someone taking "potshots" at you.You seem to be operating on this paradigm that imaginative play is entirely dependent on the rules, which ironically enough supports the underlying point which I'm making, which is that presentation can aid or hinder such play. By your own example, a reduction of "the rules" for something means that thing will be less relevant, and so will be utilized less often, which is exactly what I've been saying.It's not at all nonsensical if their motivation is to monetize the game through a recurrent spending environment, which is exactly what they've said. Given that TTRPGs are essentially content creation engines when it comes to imaginative play, it's not at all unreasonable that they'd need to find an alternative draw to digitized interfaces, and if that ends up sacrificing some of the breadth of imaginative play, then it's hard to see how they'd care about that very much. As you yourself noted, they're in business to make money, not bring the hobby to its best self.I've spoken before about what my concern is, and how it impacts the presentation and utilization of rules are only part of that.I'm not sure where you're drawing that stipulation from; maybe pay attention to what I've said instead of trying to draw out some alternative meaning?That's one aspect of what the concern is, in that the VTT necessarily incentivizes the things which it does well and disincentivizes the things which it doesn't do well.As your own example, quoted below, showcases, this is a deeply ironic statement.Which showcases the endpoint of one of the issues which I'm talking about, in that users are still able to leave the interface (i.e. no one is made to use the Apple Store), but the cost of what they've already sunk into it is high enough that it discourages that for many, since what they have there isn't transferable to a different venue.And, as noted, this is a glimpse into what the WotC VTT/DDB paradigm could come to look like, which is what enables it to have a potentially detrimental impact on the state of imaginative play. If it reaches the point where the sunk costs are too high to easily countenance, and the conveniences have become expected to the point of being taken for granted, then leaving it behind becomes onerous for users, and so its limitations are de fact accepted.Sure, and that's how things are right now. But I'm expressing concern for how things shape up later. Just because there are third-party applications that someone made to try and circumvent the ways that proprietary digital venues try and keep things proprietary doesn't mean they'll overturn a given paradigm. You said that it's "impossible" to leave the Apple Store in terms of using outside software, but there are entire communities dedicated to doing the things you've said are impossible. And yet you yourself flat-out said it was "impossible." So clearly, those third-parties that you're touting here aren't all that you're cracking them up to be.Again, I'm not sure why you're holding up your group as an exemplar of anything, here. I know that you can only speak to your own experiences, but "it's not my problem" doesn't serve as a repudiation of a broader concern.Does that include animated 3D digital minis with sound effects? Because that's apparently just one thing WotC wants their VTT to have. If people get used to having monsters that are digital eye-candy, then inputting something less than that becomes disincentivized even if it's technically possible. Which is the point; these issues are about soft limits, not the hard limits you keep mentioning.I disagree that you've correctly read what "a lot of people" will do, but even if that is the case, how many is "a lot"? I've already said that WotC doesn't need to capture the totality of the fanbase to change how the game is perceived in terms of the course of play. Likewise, if the custom content that's imported is simply less captivating than what the VTT can do on its own, then said custom content will be less of a draw in terms of the effort it requires or the effect that it has. That's how the VTT can discourage imaginative play without meaning to.And to be clear, you're suggesting that Talespire's assets can be utilized in the WotC VTT? Because that's quite the claim to make. Likewise, I've repeatedly said that 3D assets alone aren't the whole of what WotC's offering (nor can a minor outfit which I suspect has far less presence in the hobby's consciousness be realistically compared to the industry leader in terms of influence). Even then, the effect remains the same; how much do you think the people who use Talespire make use of custom content in lieu of the content that's there?I disagree. Leaving aside how WotC's version being more enticing is a very relevant concern, the issue of the game rules unto themselves being made to dovetail with what the VTT can do remains relevant unto itself.There's really no "just" about that, given that it's not only not the single issue under consideration, but also one which cannot be minimized in its impact.I'm not sure how you're quantifying "incredibly common," or why you think that WotC will allow this in the first place on their platform, but the fact that it's more work than simply using what's there goes to the crux of the issue.</blockquote>

Verification