Not sure that they will as it would encourage account sharing.I believe they offer a monthly subscription for all D&D One / 5e content. This will be low 5-10 dollars and works out monetarily because they are getting every member of the group to pay instead of just the DM buying the new books. Approximately 1 60 dollar book per year for a group of 5 vs 25/m (assuming 5/m price point) -> 300/y for a group of 5. They would offer a 1 month free trial. This gives new players ease of entry as they have limited investment to start playing with access to all the same content as everyone else. This hopefully helps grow the player base while also increasing revenue per player.
They can still keep their physical book business as the VTT subscription works great as a supplement instead of straight competition/replacement to physical book sales. Some groups may use it as that but they make more off the subscription model than the print model in this scenario so that likely isn't a concern. Also, if the character building and leveling tools work well I can see some players from in person groups subscribing just for the character building options - especially if they make it easy to print a physical character sheet from Beyond.
They can also do microtransactions for skins/mini's/tokens/possibly VTT enhancements/etc.
In short I think this is more likely to be their monetization model rather than what we see on current VTT's where the DM buys the book and shares it with the group.
This account sharing makes the system less valuable for data harvesting. I suspect that there is more value in encouraging all players and DM to register (even for free) to use the system and to encourage player registration by allowing DMs to share accounts that to see a rise of shared accounts by multiple players.If it's like the 4e model, they'd want it per player - but honestly we all shared a DDI account (or at least had the DM print our character sheets).
And just like 4e DDI, it will end as soon as Wizards drops the game, games worthless, and it becomes a dead system.
I quoted the CEO's direct line from the investors' meeting. But I guess call it speculation if you want.Marked as pure speculation.
I quoted the CEO's direct line from the investors' meeting. But I guess call it speculation if you want.
Those running Hasbro and WotC are video game people - from that industry. The examples I provided are what video game companies do to achieve "recurrent spending:" subscriptions, microtransactions, etc. Williams stated that this is the plan for achieving monetization. I literally copied and pasted it into this thread.
Ummm… cannot play on the VTT together and account share. Everyone would need an account for that.Not sure that they will as it would encourage account sharing.
I said they take away Sharing.Noone said, they take away DM's subscription to share books.
So. Even of you think it is not speculation, you have at least one step where you jump to a conclusion:
That, where you say "it suggests".
No: you make an assumption based on nothing.
True that but not everyone that is using D&DBeyond will be playing on the VTT. Many are tabletop players.Ummm… cannot play on the VTT together and account share. Everyone would need an account for that.
For those solely interested in offline play account sharing could be a thing. But even if one in the group subscribes and buys no physical books the 5/m price equates to one 60 dollar book a year which would is the same price a group would have to spend to get all books on the 1 per year production speed. Add on that margins per user are likely higher for online and I don’t see the problem.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.