DnD Shorts final video

[SAVeira]

That's what my wife immediately suggested - "Don't they know we have books?!" as she said lol.

That is the interest fact that I still need my books for online play. It is easier from most people to read and use stuff on paper then the screen. That is why I print out most of the PDFs that I use a lot. Just easier on my eyes.

 

[tetrasodium]

It occurs to me that one way to quietly fight this over the long term is to abandon online play completely.

There's no* microtransactions around an in-person table.

* - "who's bringing the snacks?" notwithstanding...

There are alternatives that don't involve using any wotc software/websites.

Spoiler: For Example

Arkenforge & Discord

Funny enough that option works in person around the dining room table with fog of war hp tracking & animations too

 

[kenada]

I think it's certainly possible, but I think it's a lot less likely with WotC having purchased Beyond.

One thing you need to account for is that Beyond has 13m registered users (maybe more). Many/most of them using Google or Apple email accounts - i.e. likely main email accounts. You don't throw away something like that. These people are registered. That's an achievement.

That's also probably why WotC bought it. It's kind of a steal for that alone.

You want to keep those people registered, and you want them to perceive any future offerings to have value.

So what you'd actually do would be to keep Beyond running, but "transition" it into being "OneDnD", without cancelling anyone's subs or ditching their products or deleting their PCs/campaigns or anything. Especially as you've claimed it's compatible. Then you add higher tiers of subs that give access to 3D VTT and so on. And when people come to look or whatever, oh, look, they're already registered, and oh here's a pop-up inviting me to customize my PC, and maybe in that process I see I could do an even better job if I spent $2.99 on microtransactions, etc. etc.

I can see a strategy that uses the existing D&D Beyond users to bootstrap the VTT. However, given WotC’s missteps with Magic and their desire for recurring revenue, I don’t think it’s a given that you would get everything you had on D&D Beyond. Users could be enticed to switch with offers of WotC coins (to spend on microtransactions) and discounts on subscriptions as credit for any content they ‘owned’ on D&D Beyond. Once enough have switched, then D&D Beyond can be shut down.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I can see a strategy that uses the existing D&D Beyond users to bootstrap the VTT. However, given WotC’s missteps with Magic and their desire for recurring revenue, I don’t think it’s a given that you would get everything you had on D&D Beyond. Users could be enticed to switch with offers of WotC coins (to spend on microtransactions) and discounts on subscriptions as credit for any content they ‘owned’ on D&D Beyond. Once enough have switched, then D&D Beyond can be shut down.

I just don't see it. You don't shut down something with 13m+ registered users. Enticements won't get you very far, because that still requires some kind of active switchover which the majority of users just won't do it.

I mean, I can't rule it out, but I can say that approach would almost certainly guarantee Sandcastle would be a financial failure from WotC's perspective.

 

[S'mon]

That is the interest fact that I still need my books for online play. It is easier from most people to read and use stuff on paper then the screen. That is why I print out most of the PDFs that I use a lot. Just easier on my eyes.

Yeah, I run Arden Vul online, initially from the PDF, but pretty soon I had a few hundred pages printed out.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Do you think that they're really going to be making public statements while in the middle of damage control that haven't gone through multiple people? It's not impossible they're doing it incompetently, but it's simpler that a higher up just decided to deny some things and send it through the same account that's otherwise been involved in the controversial stuff. And then why deny that their product is going to have a good feature.

I mean, yes, that's what damage control is. And it's also what miscommunication is: DDB is not the people handling the VTT, so they would actually not be the ones to know whether or not this feature is real: it's misdirection because people simply assume it.

Also why not confirm it? Well, if it also helps confirm other stuff that people don't like, you don't. That stuff is a package deal.

Companies lie to achieve a goal. WotC is lying about the intent of the OGL 1.0a in order to justify changes they want. Why would they lie about this instead of just not address it? Heck, why not just say "yes" and hype it up further?

They can lie about multiple things at once, and I'd say there's plenty of reason to lie about how you're going to turn DnD into a subscription-based microtransaction video game. Might not go over well in the community, you know.

What major things has he been right on, and do we know which sources in the video told him the right things vs. the wrong things?

Uh, just about everything outside of the feedback story, which got a lot of pushback. I believe he was the first to call that the OGL implementation got pulled back via email, as well as the OGL 2.0 FAQ that got released.

More than that, when he was wrong he got a whole bunch of pushback. None of that right now.

No, we definitely don't have any reason to trust DnDShorts when it comes to these particular sources. These sources have already misrepresented (at best) crucial parts of the story. And it is important that those were the parts of the story that could be verified. So what we have left are rumours from sources who seem to pretty clearly have some strong bias and have been shown to be willing to make claims that turned out to be contrary to the truth.

Uh, we don't know that. You're talking about him botching a single story by mixing up details, which were clarified later. That also got a bunch of immediate pushback, while this gets none. It would be incredibly easy (and beneficial!) to immediately quash these rumors. But instead, they aren't, just like what was going on when we were seeing leaks of 1.1.

You cannot treat DnDShorts like he is a reporter. He is not a reporter, and he is not working for reputable news media. When he gets a story completely wrong, the only consequences are to his reputation, which is mostly as an entertainer.

Okay, no. You're not going to get reporters covering this in quite the same way because there are few who are actually covering it. Multiple parts of this story (such as the $30 Subscription part) has been confirmed by multiple other people. Linda Codega is rather nice, but also unique in this regard.

If Wizards wants to dispute the accounts, they are fully able to. Certainly plenty did when he put in the idea that they don't read feedback.

There is a ton happening behind the scenes at Hasbro right now and I very much look forward to learning about it when that story finally does come out. That kind of reporting is hard. It takes time and commitment to doing the tedious parts of journalism. That's not what DnDShorts does.

I think that DND Shorts has done a fairly decent job and coming clean when you make a mistake is not a bad thing. Simply disregarding him because he's not a journalist misses that he has released information in the past that has been confirmed by others (Like the OGL 2.0 FAQ). I think it's okay to take it with some skepticism, but much of this matches what Wizards is focusing on and he's done good work so far.

 

[MockingBird]

I just don't see it. You don't shut down something with 13m+ registered users. Enticements won't get you very far, because that still requires some kind of active switchover which the majority of users just won't do it.

I mean, I can't rule it out, but I can say that approach would almost certainly guarantee Sandcastle would be a financial failure from WotC's perspective.

Yes, I am one of Dndbeyond holdouts (I haven't canceled...yet). If WotC has plans to change it or outright kill it for some MMO thing then I'm out. I will bring this up in the survey. I have (foolishly but faithfully) invested into several books (all I already own the physical books) in Dndbeyond. Hearing that Hasbro isn't happy with it and didn't want it concerns and angers me. I WAS excited for OneD&D but I gotta say my interest in it has fallen a great deal. I've got more 5e than I'd ever need for years and years. I have expendable income for this hobby but it's been feeling like Hasbro/WotC doesn't have any interest in it.

 

[Lanefan]

Not going to happen. There are reason why people have doing online TTRPG for a while now. Fantasy Grounds and Roll20 were around look before the pandemic and 5E.

I started playing remote years ago when I was going through chemo and it was not a good idea to game in person. Not looked back.

And that's exactly what Hasbro are - quite literally - banking on.

In this case it's quite possible that the only way to win really is not to play, or at least not to play in the way they want us to.

 

[Haplo781]

MS Teams should only be used for official work business. I was surprised they didn't use something secure like WhatsApp. I was also surprised he mentioned this, as it does seem like something management could track.

Unless he's lying about them using Teams to troll WotC management

 

[bostonmyk]

My take on all of this is to wait and see what really develops. We don't need to immediately know and act on any of this yet other than not to be careless with survey answers.

I think his recovery was fine, and he's showing he's a good person (or at least smart) by bailing out. The streamer clearly bit off more than they could chew, and you can bet the algorithm economics of YT encouraged it.

If they're using Hasbro/WOTC-managed Microsoft teams, he didn't out them as somebody would have the sense and means to look.

Mike