D&D (2024) New leak looks real bad

[MonsterEnvy]

Wait -- for $30/mo could I create a character and have the AI DM run me through solo adventures?

Or do I have to at least create a party of 4? This would be a bit tricky to run them all, but I could focus on one character as the main hero and the other 3 as just minions/sidekicks.

This could be an interesting way to play when I'm home sick/alone/tired of other people.

But World of Warcraft is only $15/mo -- $30/mo is kind of a jump from the MMO standard fee. What makes this service better than those to warrant the double price point?

We don't know, we don't have any actual details.

 

[Minigiant]

This strikes me as bordering on being self-contradictory; there are plenty of people for whom price can be a make-or-break point unto itself, regardless of the services offered, and even if the services turn out to be worthwhile for that much, it falls under the "change our minds as more information is released" caveat.

Depends on whether the opinion is "the item is not worth $30/Month" or "there nothing D&D related I could possibly want that is worth $30/Month".

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Right now, I was paying for a master tier and 26 people were able to play with me for free . If it is true woth the new principle, all would have to pay something... you see the difference?

Sure, but with people having their own subscriptions and a possible AI DM, no one would have to wait for you to design hooks for them to play.

After all, while the players wait, the Dungeon Master baits.

 

[Reynard]

iphones are too expensive lmfao. how do you criticize entitlement when making such a privileged post?

Maybe you don't understand what entitlement means. iPhones (or whatever, it's just an example) cost what they cost because that's the price the seller set and the market will bear it. Do you think that they should be forced to reduce the cost so you can buy that specific product? If so, that's entitlement. "Priviledged" would be me saying "I can afford an iphone, why can't everyone?" which is NOT what I am saying.

 

[enrious]

That's great to hear, thank you for that pointer.

 

[mamba]

their self aggrandizing, self interested, likes-followers-ad-revue model is built entirely around negative emotions

I can think of a few channels that do the same, but should probably not name them

they ignore any consequences of their misinformation. Sometimes the costs are minor, but sometimes they are very real.

see above

 

[Reynard]

I can think of a few channels that do the same, but should probably not name them


see above

I'm speaking broadly of the click bait culture. In my experience, you can tell a lot about a channel by how measured its responses are and how much time they give news to settle out before responding.

 

[Mistwell]

what does this have to do with anything at all? They can do so, regardless of what OGL exists and regardless of whether you can play D&D on other VTTs


that was my point…


no idea where this comes from either

We're not talking about the OGL my man. We're discussing the proposed top tier fee of $30/month and what you could get for that which would seem reasonable, the the hypothetical. Are you in the wrong thread?

 

[darjr]

I can't prove any of this, but we need to hurt WotC over it!!

Please like and subscribe.

He didn’t say that? Did he? I’ll have to listen again.

 

[Clint_L]

This whole thread just seems like a nothing burger, despite the inflammatory title. What we know is that there is an alleged leak purporting to show that at some point WotC may or may not release a new product, that may or may not have a monthly subscription service, that may or may not have a top pricing tier of $30/month, for which you may or may not get a bunch of different things (no one knows what; many may not have been invented yet), which may or may not be worth it to you.

That about sum it up?