Forgotten Realms Books to Have Several Digital DLCs, Including One Featuring Asterion

Wizards of the Coast plans to release several "digital DLCs" alongside the upcoming Forgotten Realms rulebooks. This week, Game Informer released a pair of articles about the upcoming Forgotten Realms rulebooks. Tucked away in the article is the announcement that the upcoming releases will include several "digital DLCs" that expand on the new setting. One example was Asterion's Book of Hungers, which focuses on urban vampire adventures featuring the character from Baldur's Gate 3.

No other details were made available about the upcoming releases, such as whether the new supplements will be paid DLC or free to D&D Beyond subscribers. Wizards has released several digital-only supplements alongside their various books, ranging from mini-bestiaries to supplementary adventures, but all were free to D&D Beyond subscribers or available as pre-order bonuses.

Since the Forgotten Realms books aren't currently available for pre-order, it's hard to say whether this is a new strategy or simply a continuation of current works. The fact that Wizards commissioned art specifically for Asterion's Book of Hungers and the usage of the phrase "digital DLC" suggests that this might be a new monetization scheme for the company, albeit one that makes sense given the growing use of D&D Beyond's marketplace.

 

[SkidAce]

That's a fair point. (More Bae'zel for me!) I just find her off-putting.

In Soviet Baldur's Gate, Lae'zel romance's you!

 

[Dire Bare]

I don’t know, that’s their job to figure out. Maybe they could sell it print on demand, or maybe they could include that content in the physical book (presumably at a higher price) instead of selling some of the content separately as “DLC”. If the “DLC” model is not sustainable to offer in physical form, come up with a better model, or you’ll lose sales from the people who care about owning the media they buy.

Well, we, the consumers, are all collectively the frog in the pot. Corporations will exploit us in any way we allow them to; it’s literally their purpose for existing. They also know they can expand the boundaries of what consumers will tolerate by taking baby steps - boiling us slowly. I’m just one nerve ending, but I’m going to do everything I can to alert the rest of the system that the temperature is increasing.

Bully for you, but an anti-consumer practice is an anti-consumer practice. I’m interested in continuing to live in a world where my wages can be used to acquire actual things, instead of just paying the corporate overlords a constant stream of tithes for the continued privilege of being allowed to use their things.

WotC's job to "figure it out"? They did, and decided on the format we're getting. Losing sales from people who "care about owning the media they buy" . . . I suspect that is not a huge number. Why should WotC spend extra money catering to a minority of customers?

Providing a book in digital format only is not an anti-consumer practice. It is a practice you don't personally care for, which is different.

If WotC provided "Astarion's Book of Hunger" in a wider variety of digital formats and also POD (print-on-demand), or even with mass-printed booklets distributed to retailers . . . that would be MORE consumer friendly and welcome, but not doing so isn't anti-consumer.

 

[Charlaquin]

WotC's job to "figure it out"? They did, and decided on the format we're getting. Losing sales from people who "care about owning the media they buy" . . . I suspect that is not a huge number. Why should WotC spend extra money catering to a minority of customers?

My point is, more of their customers should be concerned about this, because it’s a troubling move. The water is getting warmer, and we shouldn’t just be sitting here while it does so.

Providing a book in digital format only is not an anti-consumer practice. It is a practice you don't personally care for, which is different.

I don’t care for it because it’s worse for consumers.

If WotC provided "Astarion's Book of Hunger" in a wider variety of digital formats and also POD (print-on-demand), or even with mass-printed booklets distributed to retailers . . . that would be MORE consumer friendly and welcome, but not doing so isn't anti-consumer.

Yeah, it’s only like a degree or two warmer, it’s not boiling! Clearly I’m overreacting.

 

[Dire Bare]

My point is, more of their customers should be concerned about this, because it’s a troubling move. The water is getting warmer, and we shouldn’t just be sitting here while it does so.

I don’t care for it because it’s worse for consumers.

Yeah, it’s only like a degree or two warmer, it’s not boiling! Clearly I’m overreacting.

IMO, yes, you are overreacting.

And this repeated, "the water is getting warmer" is mildly insulting. Those of us who disagree with you, that digital only is anti-consumer, are ignorant frogs in the pot, slowly boiling to death.

Or, we are fully aware frogs relaxing in the pool, who don't feel that digital products will kill us all while a few frogs cry that the sky is falling.

 

[Remathilis]

We aren’t talking about some small indie publisher here. If we were, I’d be much more open to the digital-only model. But this is WotC. If they wanted to include the content of these “DLC” in the base book and increase the price to cover the cost of the increased page count, they could.

Easy for you if your sales are supporting that kind of cost increase, but when D&D books run 400+ pages and cost $70 per pop, I will start looking for alternate methods of acquisition.

 

[Charlaquin]

Easy for you if your sales are supporting that kind of cost increase, but when D&D books run 400+ pages and cost $70 per pop, I will start looking for alternate methods of acquisition.

Sure. That’s probably not the ideal model. Maybe save some of that content for a later release. Or sell the smaller books print on demand. Or come up with another approach. But make your content available in a physical form somehow.

 

[Kurotowa]

Digital content is not inherently bad. Having no physical option is bad.

Let me tell you a story...

Once upon a time, my father was a science fiction writer. He won some awards, even. That was long ago, though, and today he's dead and all his books have been out of print for decades. But my frail old mother still gets a small deposit every month, because it's super easy to put digital copies of his old books up for sale. No publisher is going to offer a contract to republish obscure 55 year old novels, but the barrier to entry for digital sales is so much lower. This way she keeps getting a little money, and anyone discovering (or rediscovering) my father's works has an easier option than scouring used book stores.

So no, I don't consider having a physical release a requirement. Even print-on-demand is nice but not required. What's scummy and immoral is the schemes where your digital purchase isn't really a purchase, but a long term rental than can be revoked at any point when they take the servers down. That failure state is not an inherent feature of digital only releases and should not invalidate the entire thing.

 

[Remathilis]

My honest guess is that the DLC is going to look a lot like this:

Adventure Atlas: The Mortuary - Shop D&D Beyond

Adventure Atlas: The Mortuary adds a new location, monsters and level 3-11 adventures to explore the home of the Heralds of Dust.

marketplace.dndbeyond.com

Adventure seeds, a few unique monsters, maybe a magic item or two. A dozen or so pages of hyperspecialized content. Vampire adventures in the Forgotten Realms is just the kind of thing that is big enough to warrant some interest but not big enough to warrant a print run. I'll be shocked if it's anything more than this.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

But it’s a matter of if you like humour in that style or not. I found the DA:I companions boring and humourless. Taken together, the BG3 companions form a party of Guardians of the Galaxy style misfits. Which is a good match to how we play D&D. But I know some tables prefer to treat everything with deadly seriousness, and the DA:I companions are more like that.

Especially when you have all of them with you at all times, bickering, it definitely has both that Guardians of the Galaxy vibe and, yeah, also matches my tabletop play experience.

 

[Charlaquin]

IMO, yes, you are overreacting.

And this repeated, "the water is getting warmer" is mildly insulting. Those of us who disagree with you, that digital only is anti-consumer, are ignorant frogs in the pot, slowly boiling to death.

Or, we are fully aware frogs relaxing in the pool, who don't feel that digital products will kill us all while a few frogs cry that the sky is falling.

Again, we are all collectively one frog. If we don’t collectively decide to get out of the water, none of us will get out of it. That’s why I think this is an important issue; it’s not just about what we as individuals will tolerate, it’s about what is good or bad for consumers as a whole demographic. And losing access to physical goods is not good for us as a whole demographic. But the only way to do anything about it is collectively. So here I am, pointing out to my fellow consumers that this is a change for the worse, hoping enough of us will recognize that to contribute that we can use our collective power to resist this change for the worse.