WotC Third party, DNDBeyond and potential bad side effects.

[Blue]

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.

Yes, definitely. That's why I was not describing anything as negative towards WotC.

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.

True but not the point under discussion, which was using much higher cash reserves (how many RPG companies can afford $1546mil to buy out the marketplace?) and position as market-leader to distate whihc of their competators will have access to that marketplace.

Again, I AM NOT SAYING WOTC IS DOING ANYTHING "BAD". This isn't a criticism. Mamba keeps trying to make a point that it's "fair" and treats "not anti-competitive" as a synonym. And it's not. It's doing like a for-profit company should, using it's strengths to further it's control over the market and profits. What they are doing isn't "fair", but "fair" doesn't describe many business dealings with competitors.

 

[Blue]

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

You did, but since that's a restriction on what my post is about I don't accept moving the goalposts.

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

However, this wasn't about increased reach for WotC, it was controlling which of it's competitors gets that increased reach. DnDBeyond is a one-stop marketplace that has intration into most of the major VTTs out there as well as it's own character builder and such. Players can buy material there without worry they would need to rebuy if they move VTTs as well as using it directly.

You have already admitted that WotC is not going to allow unfettered access to all publishers to the DnDBeyond marketplace. If Amazon allows companies A and B that make supporting products like settings but freezes out competitors (like Level Up: A5E), that is anti-competitive behavior.

 

[mamba]

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.

except that this is not at all what he was talking about, which was my point all along

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.

I'd say it also concerns the players

 

[Morrus]

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.

The issue isn’t royalties.

 

[Morrus]

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.

I think the disconnect lies Between the concepts of unfettered capitalism and stewards of the hobby. They can’t be both.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The issue isn’t royalties.

Don't you get a chance to get in IF you pay them enough?

 

[mamba]

You did, but since that's a restriction on what my post is about I don't accept moving the goalposts.

I was not moving the goalposts, I was clarifying where my goalposts were all along, and since yours was a reply to mine...

However, this wasn't about increased reach for WotC, it was controlling which of it's competitors gets that increased reach.

I understand that, they are in this unique position of being content creators and having their own VTT, but it is still their VTT and they can decide what goes onto it without this being anti-competitive.

DnDBeyond is a one-stop marketplace that has intration into most of the major VTTs out there as well as it's own character builder and such. Players can buy material there without worry they would need to rebuy if they move VTTs as well as using it directly.

no they cannot, because if they do switch to a different VTT, there is no guarantee at all that they can migrate their DDB data over.

For this there would need to exist an open format in which data can be imported into the various VTTs, and that can be exported out of DDB / their VTT.

You have already admitted that WotC is not going to allow unfettered access to all publishers to the DnDBeyond marketplace. If Amazon allows companies A and B that make supporting products like settings but freezes out competitors (like Level Up: A5E), that is anti-competitive behavior.

no it is not, any store can decide what they offer for sale, that in itself is not anti-competitive

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

You also have to produce content they approve of. Obvious I know, but it's important to note that this walled garden isn't going to be open to any producer who will to pay their price.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You also have to produce content they approve of. Obvious I know, but it's important to note that this walled garden isn't going to be open to any producer who will to pay their price.

That is OK for me. Actually that isbwhat they need to do. They don't want the book of erotic fantasy desaster again.

Maybe it is time though to seperate dndbeyond into different sections. For kids and for adults. Or have a parental control filter.

 

[Zaukrie]

You also have to produce content they approve of. Obvious I know, but it's important to note that this walled garden isn't going to be open to any producer who will to pay their price.

Good. There is a lot of mediocre stuff out there