WotC Third party, DNDBeyond and potential bad side effects.

[mamba]

I've already established how there is a competative edge to having that increased reach, and how WotC controls who gets it and who doesn't.

and I already told you that my post wasn’t about who gets into DDB and who doesn’t, but about competition between VTTs

Having an increased reach is not anti-competitive behavior, regardless of whether that means you take some business from other, smaller, stores

 

[DEFCON 1]

You’ve spent an awful lot of time making sure everybody knows just how much you don’t care.

Yes. And that's my choice. I'm wasting away a few hours posting on your message boards because I enjoy it, whether or not anyone agrees with me. And folks like yourself have responded back, presumably because you enjoy doing so to.

 

[DEFCON 1]

no, not at all


that is exactly what the conversation is about... people only considering what is on DDB and ignoring everything else, while WotC controls what that is

Maybe your conversation was about that... but mine was directly related to the quote I posted of SlyFlourishes in my original response post. Where he bemoaned the fact that his players were not willing to play any D&D-adjacent product or game if it was not on D&D Beyond, and tried to lay a potential blame on D&D Beyond's overwhelming presence in the market.

Then Micah tried driving the convo away from that topic by attempting to make it about essentially my grammar by "correcting" me when I said Level Up was not D&D (in relation to D&D Beyond.) And then you responded to my response to that conversation off-ramp. My fault for actually engaging Micah's side post that was meaningless to the thrust of my original argument. More fool me.

 

[Oofta]

I've already established how there is a competative edge to having that increased reach, and how WotC controls who gets it and who doesn't. That's a textbook definition of anti-competative. I don't know how to respond when you say black is white.

Again, what Amazon did, which pushed a lot of small and large booksellers out of business because they couldn't compete. A friend of mine had to close his FLGS because he couldn't compete on selling RPGs against Amazon because on the prices they could afford. Saying that isn't "anti-competative" is laughable.

Whether you like Amazon or not, they simply developed a system that worked better for people than most old school bookstores. Competition is the heart of capitalism.

There are other business, such as Uber as a random example, that purposely operated at a loss for years to wipe out competition while also doing an end-run around regulation in order to kill the taxi companies. Now that the taxi companies have mostly disappeared, they're increasing what they charge. Then there's companies that bought out competition simply to put them out of business, etc..

But being competitive by putting out a better product, one that gets more customers because it simply works better? I don't see an issue with it. When it comes to TTRPGs I fully support competition, but WOTC does not need to support competition if it harms their bottom line. It's not the way business works.

 

[mamba]

Maybe your conversation was about that... but mine was directly related to the quote I posted of SlyFlourishes in my original response post. Where he bemoaned the fact that his players were not willing to play any D&D-adjacent product or game if it was not on D&D Beyond, and tried to lay a potential blame on D&D Beyond's overwhelming presence in the market.

funny, because that is what my post was about, after your posts completely missed SkyFlourish’s point, as others have pointed out too.

So I guess you keep on missing it, while insisting that you are not…

 

[Oofta]

Related to the discussion, DDB just added Dungeons of Drakkenheim, by The Dungeon Dudes. Not only does it add a bunch of monsters and spells, it will also include maps.

They certainly seem on the path to broader support of 3PP, although changes for things like core gameplay (e.g. level up, new classes or feats) may or may not be coming for various reasons. But I think it's pretty cool that they're doing this and that it supports the maps tool.

 

[Clint_L]

Related to the discussion, DDB just added Dungeons of Drakkenheim, by The Dungeon Dudes. Not only does it add a bunch of monsters and spells, it will also include maps.

They certainly seem on the path to broader support of 3PP, although changes for things like core gameplay (e.g. level up, new classes or feats) may or may not be coming for various reasons. But I think it's pretty cool that they're doing this and that it supports the maps tool.

I just bought Lairs of Etharis. It’s super cool, and a bargain as well, IMO, but I only bought it because it’s on DDB.

There are now a lot of folks in my position: we are fully integrated to DDB because it makes our D&D experience much better. WotC didn’t coerce us; in fact, I was using DDB for years before WotC owned it. It’s just a really good product.

I also don’t see it as anti-competitive. Putting the SRD into Creative Commons was a strongly pro-competition move. Maintaining control of the identity of their core brand, though, just seems like common sense. Is McDonald’s anti-competitive because they don’t sell Whoppers?

 

[Morrus]

Related to the discussion, DDB just added Dungeons of Drakkenheim, by The Dungeon Dudes.

It's what prompted the discussion.

 

[DEFCON 1]

funny, because that is what my post was about, after your posts completely missed SkyFlourish’s point, as others have pointed out too.

So I guess you keep on missing it, while insisting that you are not…

I didn't miss his main point... I just didn't comment on that part because I wasn't interested in that part. I commented on the part I quoted because that was the part I cared about... people who complain about the ubiquity of WotC's version of Dungeons & Dragons because they can't find people to play their own idiosyncratic version of Dungeons & Dragons. I think those people need to look inward as to why that's the case that they can't find people to play the game in the style they want... rather than bemoaning the fact that WotC produces a version they don't like and yet almost everyone else still wants to play.

All the other stuff SF talked about? Especially all the stuff about the business side of D&D (which mostly is a concern for those people who earn a partial or full living producing Dungeons & Dragons material)? That doesn't concern me, which is why I didn't mention it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So its easy. WotC paid 150 Millions for that walled garden. So they better make some profit out of it.

If you want to share that garden. You have to pay WotC a tiny sum. That is how all of that works.