Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6918042" data-attributes="member: 37579">So much of those requests I don't share.I don't need the magazines. The magazine's content isn't particularly desirable anymore. That's an outdated business model. It's like selling D&D 8-tracks. There are three types of article in the magazines: adventure, crunch, and advice. With the DMs Guild, I can get whatever digital crunch I need. And it can be updated as errors pop up. Ditto adventures. And it's written by the exact same people who would have freelanced for the magazines. Only instead of getting a whole wealth of content I don't want, I can pick-and-choose exactly what I want.And D&D advice articles have entirely and completely been replaced by blogs. Or Twitter.What's left when you cut out the above? Dragon+ and Sage Advice.I don't need an online character builder. Making a character isn't hard. In 5e, I can allow my players level up during the session, which I wouldn't have dared to do in 3e or 4e unless I needed a 30-minute break to get food. The character builder was expensive to make, expensive to maintain, doesn't fill a purpose anymore, and reduced the number of books sold. It'd be more practical for WotC to dig a big pit, fill it full of money, and light it on fire.I don't need an in-house VTT. WotC isn't a software company, and their software was always <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />. The free version of Roll20 is already better than the paid VTT from WotC. Okay, you can't do pick-up groups with Roll20. But that's *super* niche as a request. I'm not sure how many people really want to just spontaneously play D&D with strangers. But ask Roll20 and maybe they can work in a pick-up-group feature. (Not sure about Fantasy Grounds. That might already exist.) I think what's best for D&D is something that's sustainable for a longer period. Rapid edition changes are not good for D&D and following 3e and 4e, D&D was near death with a fragmented audience that were all playing different editions and not always buying the books. A longer, stable edition allows more people time to come into D&D, without having to worry about what edition people are playing or feeling confused by different books on the shelves and incompatible rules. That's good for the game and the consumer over the long term. Because you have to look at things over the course of years and not months.I've long been an advocate for releasing new content more like a board game and less like... well, whatever D&D was doing prior. The hobby board game is a known business model that has proved sustainable for years. The wave of content strategy that was tried by 3e and 4e didn't prove very sustainable. And despite being willing to accept far, far smaller profit margins, it doesn't look like it's worked well for Pathfinder either, as they've said they regretted the pace of releases (hence why they're doing things super slow for Starfinder).What the small subsets of fans desire - such as those who wants more D&D crunch on a weekly basis via an online magazine - isn't necessarily good for D&D or WotC. I know you "don’t care for profit margins so I don’t care from a business view". And would probably be happy if WotC started selling books at a loss so you could get the product for cheaper. But if WotC stops caring about things from a business perspective then D&D starts losing money and the RPG gets shut down. They'll likely keep handing out the licenses, so the brand will continue, but they're not going to just keep publishing product because it makes people happy. They're a business not a charity. But we've talked about this before. Repeatedly. Probably bi-monthly. And you continue to believe 5e is somehow doing poorly, despite all evidence to the contrary. So I doubt anything I've said here will change your mind. </blockquote>

Verification