D&D General Interview with D&D VP Jess Lanzillo on Comicbook.com

[SlyFlourish]

Comicbook.com has an interview with the new D&D Vice President Jess Lanzillo.

Here are some interesting quotes with my own commentary.

We asked Lanzillo to talk about the recurring fears of digitalization within Dungeons & Dragons and whether there was any mandated shift to digital.

"I think it's unfortunate that this dichotomy has been set up," Lanzillo said. "It's artificial in so many ways. How did most of us play D&D during the lockdown? Was it necessarily everyone's preferred way of playing it? Hard to say. Some people found that they've continued playing digitally. They're playing on Maps on D&D Beyond and on Discord and on voice calls. Many of us play in person, a more tactile experience. I was probably one of the last migrators to the D&D Beyond character sheet, because I am an artist, so I just draw all of my stuff, and I want to do it in this very bespoke fashion."

"I'm a big fan of being able to provide play experiences to people any way they want to play them," Lanzillo continued. "I actually look at it as a form of gatekeeping to be like, "Your version of playing is stupid, and my version of playing is good."

"I just think it's all part of the same ecosystem, and putting things up against each other and trying to villainize one thing over the other...it's just about giving people the experiences for wherever they're at in their life and whoever the people are around them," Lanzillo said.

This feels like misdirection. The question had nothing to do with a false dichotomy between players who play online and those who play in person. She steered the real question about a fear of a future digital D&D and mandates from on-high to shift to digital to a culture war between players who like playing in person and those who play online. That was never the concern. I don't know anyone who would say that playing online shouldn't exist. This is about a fear of WOTC trying to take further control of the game by pushing it into their own walled garden.

But giving players the freedom to create how they want to create, to play how they want to play, is really what it's all about.

If by "freedom" you mean paying us rent to our own imaginations. I'd like the freedom to create by using PDFs of the rulesbooks so I know I'll have them forever. How about that freedom?

Going into this reading this interview, I was prepared for it to aim at the audience she had rather than opening up to any real truth to what decisions are going on with Hasbro and D&D. For me, the only thing that matters are when Hasbro and WOTC commit to things they can't take back like the 5.1 SRD in the CC, the SRD in four languages, actually producing physical books we can buy and keep, support for downloadable VTT platforms like Foundry and Fantasy Grounds – true Ulysses pacts.

I'd have loved to hear:

• Further confirmation of a 5.2 SRD in the CC in March 2024.
• Further commitment to release D&D on other digital platforms like Foundry and Fantasy Grounds.
• Further commitment that all major D&D releases will be in physical books.

Instead, I'm hearing I'm gatekeeping the hobby by being concerned that WOTC is shoring up the walls of their walled garden...

The Blob of Annihilation has a skull of a god inside of it.

Ok, that sounds pretty cool.

 

[Reynard]

That reads A LOT like an intentional shift toward digital play as the primary venue.

 

[bedir than]

If by "freedom" you mean paying us rent to our own imaginations. I'd like the freedom to create by using PDFs of the rulesbooks so I know I'll have them forever. How about that freedom?

When asked about going digital only she suggests that people should be able to play how they want, that she is a primarily physical player.
That clearly means that they will still have books, something a significant portion of the commentariat has insisted will no longer be true.

While her answer isn't perfect, it does answer one of the conspiracies out there.

Also, WotC is putting 2024 rules on Roll20, Fantasy Grounds and Foundry. We know this, you've talked about this on your podcast. They haven't announced anything after the core rules yet, so there's not a reason to push that future content will be there.

 

[Reynard]

When asked about going digital only she suggests that people should be able to play how they want, that she is a primarily physical player.
That clearly means that they will still have books, something a significant portion of the commentariat has insisted will no longer be true.

While her answer isn't perfect, it does answer one of the conspiracies out there.

Also, WotC is putting 2024 rules on Roll20, Fantasy Grounds and Foundry. We know this, you've talked about this on your podcast. They haven't announced anything after the core rules yet, so there's not a reason to push that future content will be there.

Did we read the same quote?

 

[Reynard]

I wonder what percentage of paying D&D customers use Beyond versus buy books. Have earnings calls ever given us any insight into that?

 

[bedir than]

Did we read the same quote?

Word by Hoffer

One of the biggest questions going into Gen Con was Hasbro's approach to Dungeons & Dragons, especially in terms of a potential shift to all-digital play.

Her response

Many of us play in person, a more tactile experience. I was probably one of the last migrators to the D&D Beyond character sheet, because I am an artist, so I just draw all of my stuff, and I want to do it in this very bespoke fashion.

I'm a big fan of being able to provide play experiences to people any way they want to play them,

Nothing about that confirms a digital-only future. It's the exact opposite.

 

[Alzrius]

That reads A LOT like an intentional shift toward digital play as the primary venue.

Which tracks with a recent statement from Chris Cocks about going "all in on becoming a digital play company."

https://web.archive.org/web/20240726064437/https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/25/hasbro-has-earnings-q2-2024.html

 

[SlyFlourish]

When asked about going digital only she suggests that people should be able to play how they want, that she is a primarily physical player.
That clearly means that they will still have books, something a significant portion of the commentariat has insisted will no longer be true.

While her answer isn't perfect, it does answer one of the conspiracies out there.

Also, WotC is putting 2024 rules on Roll20, Fantasy Grounds and Foundry. We know this, you've talked about this on your podcast. They haven't announced anything after the core rules yet, so there's not a reason to push that future content will be there.

Yeah, I totally expect they're going to follow through with their announcements of support for Foundry, Fantasy Grounds, and Roll 20. I expect they will release the 5.2 SRD into the CC next year. I'm sure they're going to keep publishing books.

But instead of calling those who worry about a future digital only D&D experience "gatekeepers", she could have addressed the actual concerns directly.

 

[Shardstone]

I'm ok with a shift to digital play, and I agree that this kind of hardhitting journalism needs to be done and they need to be kept accountable. While the slippery slope fallacy is normally incorrect, in this case, I have no doubt that WotC will sink into the same market-depravity other digital-focused media have fallen too. Abusive subscription increases every year; exclusive content that powercreeps the game; the inability to use core tools without paying for them, which you already bought once via the hardcover book -- these things need to be looked out for.

But, I am a primarily digital player, and I am hopeful that WotC puts out a good digital setup that I can enjoy BEFORE shareholder greed inevitably enshittifies it.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I wonder what percentage of paying D&D customers use Beyond versus buy books. Have earnings calls ever given us any insight into that?

I can't speak for the world but when I polled my YouTube audience in 2023, it was roughly four in ten regularly used D&D Beyond. That's not instead of buying books, though. Just use.