Wizards of the Coast Is Sunsetting Sigil's Active Development

EN World has received confirmation that Wizards of the Coast is planning to transition Sigil, its just-released VTT, to a D&D Beyond feature with no large future development planned. Earlier this week, Wizards of the Coast laid off approximately 30 staff members tied to the development of Sigil, a new D&D-focused VTT system. Ahead of the layoff, Dan Rawson, senior vice president of Dungeons & Dragons, sent out an internal email confirming that the project was essentially being shuttered. Rascal was the first to report the news and EN World was able to independently confirm the accuracy of their report.

The email can be read below:

Dear Team, I want to share an important update regarding Sigil. After several months of alpha testing, we’ve concluded that our aspirations for Sigil as a larger, standalone game with a distinct monetization path will not be realized. As such, we cannot maintain a large development effort and most of the Sigil team will be separated from the company this week. We are, however, proud of what the Sigil team has developed and want to make sure that fans and players on DDB can use it. To that end, we will transition Sigil to a DDB feature. We will maintain a small team to sustain Sigil and release products already developed at no additional cost to users. To those moving on as a result of this decision, we will provide robust support, including severance packages, 2024 bonus, career placement services, and internal opportunities where possible.

I want to take a moment to praise the entire Sigil team for their incredible work to deliver this product to our community. One of the things I’m most proud of here at D&D is our strong sense of purpose. We aim to honor our current players while ensuring D&D continues to build connections and bring joy to future generations. And that’s what the Sigil team was doing. Although we haven’t fully realized our vision for Sigil to scale, the team should be proud of their achievements.”

A full breakdown of Sigil's tumultous development can be found here. Rascal has several additional details about recent events that led to Sigil's early demise.

 

[Distracted DM]

I really don't get these posts. Lots of people can't. Nothing about a VTT stops this.

Trying to understand said posts, I think the fear is that the game will be designed for online play over in-person tabletop.
I'm not exactly sure what that looks like, but I can understand the fear even if I don't agree with it.

 

[teitan]

This is spooky. Like Deja vu

 

[Clint_L]

Trying to understand said posts, I think the fear is that the game will be designed for online play over in-person tabletop.
I'm not exactly sure what that looks like, but I can understand the fear even if I don't agree with it.

I agree that that seems to be the underlying fear, but I don't think it is something we really need to worry about. WotC have been very vocal about prioritizing in-person play. And even if you don't trust their word (I know some don't), I don't see how they particularly benefit from trying to drive the game towards primarily online play. It seems like a risky and potentially expensive strategy, and for what benefit?

Adding tools that make the game easier to access both online and in person, which is what DDB does, makes sense. That can only grow your market. Spending money to actively shrink probably the largest chunk of your player base (those who mostly play in person) seems like an obviously terrible idea.

I definitely would not equate DDB with online play. DDB is, for me, an extremely valuable, time-saving tool, and I think I have only played in person since pandemic restrictions lifted.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I don't see how they particularly benefit from trying to drive the game towards primarily online play. It seems like a risky and potentially expensive strategy, and for what benefit?

The big benefit is they could switch from a model where customers buy the books once and never need to buy anything from WotC again to an ongoing subscription model. A lack of guaranteed ongoing revenue has been an issue with RPGs since the TSR days.

They haven't actually made any successful steps in this direction, though. If Sigil had been a runaway success and people were throwing money at them to use it, maybe that could have been the model, but obviously, that didn't happen.

So, for me, this fear goes in the pile with "they want to switch over to microtransactions": a scary idea for people to wind each other up with, but nothing that there's any actual evidence that it's happening. (I wish WotC would bring back their a la carte sales on DDB, which is the closest they've gotten to microtransactions, unless you count the sale of digital dice, which I cannot imagine is a big money-maker for them.)

 

[Echohawk]

The big benefit is they could switch from a model where customers buy the books once and never need to buy anything from WotC again to an ongoing subscription model. [...] They haven't actually made any successful steps in this direction, though.

I would argue that D&D Beyond, which is very much a subscription model combined with individual purchases is a success. The fact that I'm paying the subscription fee to be able to share those purchases with my players is an innovative way to lock me into a subscription model without me feeling like I'm renting my individual content purchases.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

I agree that that seems to be the underlying fear, but I don't think it is something we really need to worry about. WotC have been very vocal about prioritizing in-person play. And even if you don't trust their word (I know some don't), I don't see how they particularly benefit from trying to drive the game towards primarily online play. It seems like a risky and potentially expensive strategy, and for what benefit?

Adding tools that make the game easier to access both online and in person, which is what DDB does, makes sense. That can only grow your market. Spending money to actively shrink probably the largest chunk of your player base (those who mostly play in person) seems like an obviously terrible idea.

I definitely would not equate DDB with online play. DDB is, for me, an extremely valuable, time-saving tool, and I think I have only played in person since pandemic restrictions lifted.

DDB pre wizbro was an excellent tool for both in-person and online games, since they bought the site it has become increasingly difficult to use anytime they modify the site, out of 30 plus players in the groups i play in, 1 yes 1 single player uses DDB, and everyone else uses books pencil and paper at the table. I am sure they all use the site to generate characters, but at the tables I play at DDB is dead in regards to actually being used in game.

The big benefit is they could switch from a model where customers buy the books once and never need to buy anything from WotC again to an ongoing subscription model. A lack of guaranteed ongoing revenue has been an issue with RPGs since the TSR days.

They haven't actually made any successful steps in this direction, though. If Sigil had been a runaway success and people were throwing money at them to use it, maybe that could have been the model, but obviously, that didn't happen.

So, for me, this fear goes in the pile with "they want to switch over to microtransactions": a scary idea for people to wind each other up with, but nothing that there's any actual evidence that it's happening. (I wish WotC would bring back their a la carte sales on DDB, which is the closest they've gotten to microtransactions, unless you count the sale of digital dice, which I cannot imagine is a big money-maker for them.)

DDB would, in my experience, benefit from a better marketing department and strategy the current philosophy of cramming new books down the throats of users at the expense of sacrificing usability on the site is not a sustainable plan.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I would argue that D&D Beyond, which is very much a subscription model combined with individual purchases is a success. The fact that I'm paying the subscription fee to be able to share those purchases with my players is an innovative way to lock me into a subscription model without me feeling like I'm renting my individual content purchases.

It's a secondary source of revenue for WotC. Their primary source of revenue is selling one-and-done books. The fantasy has allegedly been to have an ongoing subscription fee be where all the money comes from, like Spotify for D&D. (And no, I don't think that's going to happen in the foreseeable future.)

 

[Staffan]

Yes, and I am speaking from the point of view of the customer (and also from someone who worked at a startup who attempted the same kind of thing in the past, which also lacked a business model in much the same way).

I'd argue that if a product's business model doesn't work out, it is a failure as a product. It might still be a good book, app, or whatever, but it's not a good product and the maker will likely discontinue it unless they can find a business model that works.

 

[SkidAce]

The big benefit is they could switch from a model where customers buy the books once and never need to buy anything from WotC again to an ongoing subscription model. A lack of guaranteed ongoing revenue has been an issue with RPGs since the TSR days.

And if they did...I would keep running 5E with the material I already have, and teaching people 5e, and they would play with other people and teach them 5e...all offline. You know, if one person, just one person does this they may think they are really really sick and they will ignore them.
And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both grognards and they won't care about either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people playing 5e without spending money. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day playing 5E D&D with their friends without a subscription. And friends they may think it's a movement.
And that's what it is, the Anti-Online Only Massacre Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the guitar.*



*apologies to Arlo Guthrie

 

[Clint_L]

DDB pre wizbro was an excellent tool for both in-person and online games, since they bought the site it has become increasingly difficult to use anytime they modify the site, out of 30 plus players in the groups i play in, 1 yes 1 single player uses DDB, and everyone else uses books pencil and paper at the table. I am sure they all use the site to generate characters, but at the tables I play at DDB is dead in regards to actually being used in game.

Okay, I've been using since long before WotC bought it, every single person in my games still uses it while playing, and it has millions of users. I've found that it is better than ever - Maps is an incredible new tool.

DDB would, in my experience, benefit from a better marketing department and strategy the current philosophy of cramming new books down the throats of users at the expense of sacrificing usability on the site is not a sustainable plan.

I've never felt like a new book was crammed down my throat, so I'm not sure how to interpret this. They offer to sell them to me, often at a steep discount. There are no penalties if I decline, which I often do. I have not found that usability has declined; it still saves me hours of work each week.