Dhampir and Other Species To Be Included in Astarion's Book of Hungers

The dhampir will be among several playable species included in the digital exclusive Astarion's Book of Hungers, which is currently only available as part of a $159.99 "Ultimate Bundle." Announced today during a panel on the upcoming Forgotten Realms content at Gen Con, the dhampir will make its return in the upcoming "digital DLC" for the Forgotten Realms books. An Ultimate Bundle was also put up for pre-order on D&D Beyond, which includes 8 species. Assumably, the dhampir and seven other species will appear in Astarion's Book of Hungers and perhaps split with one other unnamed DLC that's also included in the bundle. A third DLC, Netheril's Fall, is an adventure of unspecified length.

The fact that the dhampir and other species content will be included as "digital DLC" is interesting for several reasons. D&D previously made three species - the grung, locathah, and tortle - available exclusively as digital content. However, all three were released to benefit charity, with the tortle eventually making its way into Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse. So, while this wouldn't be the first time that D&D made player-facing content exclusive digitally, the intent (charity versus "Digital DLC") is certainly different. Additionally, it's unclear whether these digital DLCs will be available to purchase separately or if they'll only be available via the Ultimate Bundle, which includes physical and digital copies of the Forgotten Realms books, plus the three DLC packets.

 

[Reynard]

I for one am appalled by it, but I seem to be in the minority, at least around here. A lot of people seem to think digital-only is somehow the only financially viable way the material in these books could ever reasonably be published. Which seems like an insane thing to believe IMO, but that was the tact several people took to defend it when I expressed my concerns over it.

There are 3 of them right? Maybe they intend to put out a compiled hardcover next year?

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I for one am appalled by it, but I seem to be in the minority, at least around here. A lot of people seem to think digital-only is somehow the only financially viable way the material in these books could ever reasonably be published. Which seems like an insane thing to believe IMO, but that was the tact several people took to defend it when I expressed my concerns over it.

I view these books as maybe equivalent of a dungeon magazine issue, adjusted for inflation.

 

[Dire Bare]

I for one am appalled by it, but I seem to be in the minority, at least around here. A lot of people seem to think digital-only is somehow the only financially viable way the material in these books could ever reasonably be published. Which seems like an insane thing to believe IMO, but that was the tact several people took to defend it when I expressed my concerns over it.

Yes, what an insane position to take, it couldn't simply be a difference of reasonable opinions.

 

[Zardnaar]

Speaking only for myself, 'digital only' may as well not exist. If it's platform locked its even worse.

Preach it brother!!!

If they keep doing it or font release in dead tree maybe Daggerheart or whatever will start looking appealing.

 

[Charlaquin]

There are 3 of them right? Maybe they intend to put out a compiled hardcover next year?

Maybe? I can certainly hope, but I won’t hold my breath.

I view these books as maybe equivalent of a dungeon magazine issue, adjusted for inflation.

That’s an assumption. The fact is we don’t know what they’re going to contain. But, regardless, I can’t imagine that digital-only was the only financially viable option for publication. This is WotC we’re talking about, not some small indie publisher. If they wanted to release this material in a physical format, I’m sure they could find a way to make that happen. This looks very much to me like testing the audience’s reaction to a digital-only first-party product that isn’t part of a charity or giveaway. If it does well, I fully expect to see more such digital-only releases in the future. This is WotC’s MO, they push consumer boundaries slowly so that they can normalize the practices and then push further.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes, what an insane position to take, it couldn't simply be a difference of reasonable opinions.

Sorry, but I do think “there’s no possible way WotC could have made Dhampirs financially viable in a physical product release” is an insane position to take. If you don’t have a problem with it being digital-only, that’s a difference in reasonable opinions. If you think it couldn’t have been printed in paper without bankrupting WotC, then you and I just aren’t living in the same reality.

Preach it brother!!!

If they keep doing it or font release in dead tree maybe Daggerheart or whatever will start looking appealing.

Not sure who you’re encouraging to preach, but if it’s me it would be “sister.”

 

[Zardnaar]

Sorry, but I do think “there’s no possible way WotC could have made Dhampirs financially viable in a physical product release” is an insane position to take. If you don’t have a problem with it being digital-only, that’s a difference in reasonable opinions. If you think it couldn’t have been printed in paper without bankrupting WotC, then you and I just aren’t living in the same reality.

Not sure who you’re encouraging to preach, but if it’s me it would be “sister.”

I was responding to Scribe.

If it was you I would use sister.

WotC is Sideshow Bob+rakes at this point.

 

[Charlaquin]

I was responding to Scribe.

If it was you I would use sister.

WotC is Sideshow Bob+rakes at this point.

Oh, that makes sense. Scribe has had me blocked for ages. I understand why blocking is two-way, but I really wish the forum would make it clearer when I’m missing context from a conversation.

 

[Zardnaar]

Oh, that makes sense. Scribe has had me blocked for ages.

Derp gotcha.

I dont use the block function. Cultural side effect of "harden up buttercup" mentality i suppose.

Bad@beingkiwi I liked D&D over rugby.

 

[Charlaquin]

Der gotcha.

I dont use the block function. Cultural side effect of "harden up buttercup" mentality i suppose.

Eh, I’m from the special snowflake generation and I don’t use block function either. I support its existence for the benefit of those who prefer to use it, but personally I’d rather be able to see what the other person is saying and ignore it the old fashioned way. I don’t want to voluntarily deprive myself of information.