| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
True, what I mean is people have always had extras to get for the game, even though you've never needed them.
Would I get them if I used this new D&D One mess....not likely. I mean I make my own tokens for Fantasy Ground as it is.
(As for Star Wars dice....I have a 3d printer for those. They weight a lot less cause they are basically hollow and I had to paint in the symbols myself, but they work just fine)
Trying to lock the game behind their own private IP... stupid plan I think. Too many people already use Fantasy Grounds, Roll20 and a dozen other programs out there for playing. Coming along and saying "You can only play the game on our service" that's a suicide move.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Costume parts for your 3D mini in their 3D VTT you have to use because they won't have an SRD ain't cheap!
Proceeding from the assumption that their won’t be an SRD, which it’s worth pointing out is not a thing they have stated
Themed dice systems like FFG's Star Wars/Genesys or Legends of the Five Rings are a good example of microtransactions. You can only purchase them from Edge, nobody else is allowed to sell them without some crafty legal-ese to make them "generic fantasy dice" and even then they could plausibly get sued over it if they impacted Edge's bottom line.
"You can't play a d20 game without some d20 dice" is not.
Not quite, as those dice are easily ignored by following the guidance in the CRB for the FFG and Edge game lines about how to play without the narrative dice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for clarification: Will print books and pdfs still be available?
Because if not this all sounds like DnD CC to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ok so I haven't been keeping much of an eye on this since me and my group are still fine playing PF1, but one of the guys at my table was saying part of the goal for the new D&D edition was to Eliminate Homebrew stuff, which strikes me as both ridiculous and impossible.
If he had said make homebrewing less necessary, I might agree with him. But certainly from now until the release of the revised PHB in 2024, the playtest will if anything inspire more homebrews. I started a 5E campaign between the releases of Spelljammer and the 1st OneD&D playtest and extrapolated my house rules from what had been published to that point -- and I deliberately avoided too closely following any UA material released to that point, especially if it seemed to be weakening PCs at that point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for clarification: Will print books and pdfs still be available?
Because if not this all sounds like DnD CC to me.
WotC hasn’t sold PDFs in ages, no?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for clarification: Will print books and pdfs still be available?
Because if not this all sounds like DnD CC to me.
They have made no statement about ceasing production of print books. Just that now there will be direct integration with D&D Beyond and their new VTT.
It has, however, been 13 years since WOTC sold pdf copies of their books.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for clarification: Will print books and pdfs still be available?
Because if not this all sounds like DnD CC to me.
They have made no statement about ceasing production of print books. Just that now there will be direct integration with D&D Beyond and their new VTT.
It has, however, been 13 years since WOTC sold pdf copies of their books.
of the current edition
A lot of their stuff from 4E back to Advanced can be found on DrivethruRPG. Heck I think I even saw Gamma World there
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
of the current edition
A lot of their stuff from 4E back to Advanced can be found on DrivethruRPG. Heck I think I even saw Gamma World there
Fine, I’ll revise.
WOTC stopped selling pdf copies of new releases back in 2009. Since WOTC ceased selling PDFs the only PDF content available for sale is of prior editions through a third party vendor in an archival scan format. The last eight years of official content has not been released officially in the pdf format at all. There is perhaps a possibility that 5e content could sell via the same third party platform once One D&D evolves into its final form but that is entirely speculative. It is also likely that the official 5e digital content will, as stated officially, remain backward compatible and sell only through dndbeyond just as it currently does.
Happy?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Happy?
You're taking things a little too seriously here. I don't think anyone's going to really lose sleep over who won the battle of the 6e preview in the Paizo off-topic subforum.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're taking things a little too seriously here. I don't think anyone's going to really lose sleep over who won the battle of the 6e preview in the Paizo off-topic subforum.
Because I responded to someone unnecessarily correcting my statement that WOTC hasn't sold pdfs in 13 years by stating that another company does sell them, means it's a "battle" that I'm taking "too seriously?"
Okay...
I thought it was a conversation. But I guess being overly corrective of others is only not "too serious" when you're defining microtransactions?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Today in the JBE One D&D Blog, we talk about Decoupling Races from Ability Score Bonuses and Penalties. Give it a read today.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Incidentally, this first playtest period was supposed to end on the 15th, but WotC extended it another two weeks. I wonder if they're looking for more feedback, or if the next packet just wasn't ready yet? It's presumably going to include Classes, which I imagine will make or break One in the eyes of most.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I doubt they will present all of the classes or even all of the rules in their survey process. They’ve likely structured a series of feedback windows on the things they feel need outside feedback and left everything else to internal discussion.
It’s certainly possible to structure a playtest to get meaningful feedback for a shorter release window than One currently has. PF2e’s playtest began one year prior to the release of the final version of the game, and feedback certainly shaped the final product in that instance
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Question: might One D&D's lack of an OGL be good news for other game systems?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It cant hurt (if it eventuates) but I think the 3PP ecosystem has changed considerably since 4E days, so I'm skeptical it would be as significant a move as it was back then.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It cant hurt (if it eventuates) but I think the 3PP ecosystem has changed considerably since 4E days, so I'm skeptical it would be as significant a move as it was back then.
True. But (yes, I'm old), my intuition is that a lack of some form of OGL will still end badly for WoTC.
I hope that they reconsider before making a final decision.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only time will tell really. If HASBRO (who, to be honest, are the ones actually making the calls on these big decisions and not the rank and file or even exec WotC staff, sadly) really wants to make ONE D&D in a manner that forces users into their own walled garden ecosystem like it APPEARS to be happening (putting aside the unofficial/pirated/unlicenced/fanmade options that would SURELY arise if such a thing actually happens and they strongarm all other VTTs and the like to NOT use the ONE D&D rules/setting/game) then I am extremely doubtful that any OGL as we know it will ever come about in any manner that allows gamers at large to create content outside of their own proprietary ONE D&D ecosystem that they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build.
The fact that they overpaid as much as they did for sole control and ownership of D&D Beyond and plan to integrate it with an in-house VTT, roll out desktop+mobile apps, and almost certainly continue down the road of making content available for purchase via microtransactions (this is already in place now in a kind of low-level manner via Class pricing and "skins" for dice) has me thinking they are shooting for the moon to create a D&D "Killer App" that they can force the entire community into using to the exception of all other competitors, at least when it comes to playing ONE D&D, which all current evidence seems to point to just wholesale "legally" being a revision of 5e so they can simply pull 5e content off other platforms.
In short, I don't think the prospects for another open-ended OGL like what has been known for the past few decades are very good at all. I'm sure there will be SOMETHING to allow 3PP content but I heavily doubt it will be allowed legally exist in a way that can generate any form of monetary income for authors unless they publish/create/sell it on the HASBRO-owned ecosystem they're building, which I suspect will in fact itself be named ONE D&D or ONE D&D+ when the dust settles.
Perhaps I'm off base on this, some might call me a pessimist, and I'd LOVE to be proven wrong but with the amount of money they're dumping into this currently stated trajectory I just do not see them deciding to just "leave money on the table" when they essentially are setup to create an access pathway and legal method to keep their IP and game protected and functionally available only through the dedicated channel.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually not sure microtransactions are a bad thing for RPGs and VTTs supporting them. The entire ecosystem of pen and paper RPGs is already essentially based on microtransactions, depending on how you define "micro".
Buy your core rule book to start out at $50 or so, then you can keep buying hardcover rulebooks for the same price for a lot of content. You can buy smaller 64 or even 32 page supplements for $20-30, and digital only pdfs as small as a few pages for a few bucks, or larger for higher amounts.
If a new hardcover comes out, and has 4 new classes in it, I don't think it's a problem to digitally let someone buy just 1 class and the directly supporting feats and spells for a small amount for example.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its worth remembering that the OGL is irrevocable, so they cant actually stop OGL products for D&D.
I do suspect that the SRD wont be updated though, which could make wordings very awkward.
And theyre clearly resuming their push for "everything online" so actually getting your products to tables might be an issue.
Perhaps the DMs guild is going to be the way of the future.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its worth remembering that the OGL is irrevocable, so they cant actually stop OGL products for D&D.
I do suspect that the SRD wont be updated though, which could make wordings very awkward.
And theyre clearly resuming their push for "everything online" so actually getting your products to tables might be an issue.
Perhaps the DMs guild is going to be the way of the future.
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. I'm an old fart (much like Themetricsystem), so Wizards is probably right, despite my intuition that this won't go as planned.
But, if Wizards proves to be wrong, it will be the "4th Edition debacle" all over again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Heh. I’m up there in the old man club (I’m 52)
My edition war was the money grab of 2nd edition :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Heh. I’m up there in the old man club (I’m 52)
My edition war was the money grab of 2nd edition :p
I'm still older then you are. :P
I'm just not as convinced that the market has changed as much as you appear to be.I think that Hasbro/Wizards is in real danger of overreaching and causing a backlash against D&D - exactly what happened with Hasbro's mishandling of 4E.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh don’t get me wrong. I think they’ll be okay, but I’m by no means convinced.
Just guessing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh don’t get me wrong. I think they’ll be okay, but I’m by no means convinced.
Just guessing.
Okay. So we are looking at the same things.
I'm just not as optimistic.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
comicbook.com reached out for clarification and got a statement that seems to indicate an evolution of the current OGL rather than out and out removal of it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
comicbook.com reached out for clarification and got a statement that seems to indicate an evolution of the current OGL rather than out and out removal of it.
I wouldn't say that the official statement really implies that at all, it was more of a non-statement while indicating they're aware that there are concerns about it.
"We will continue to support the thousands of creators making third-party D&D content with the release of One D&D in 2024. While it is certain our Open Game License (OGL) will continue to evolve, just as it has since its inception, we're too early in the development of One D&D to give more specifics on the OGL or System Reference Document (SRD) at this time."
The fact that they wouldn't come out to say that they WILL have an OGL/SRD that is freely available is a bad sign if anything. To me, this reeks of a pivot to force 3PP and homebrew integration to use the exclusive platform they're building. If they actually intended to support actual OGL/SRD support and to tamp down the fearmongering they would/should have done so in a FAR less vague manner.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"We will continue to support the thousands of creators making third-party D&D content with the release of One D&D in 2024. While it is certain our Open Game License (OGL) will continue to evolve, just as it has since its inception, we're too early in the development of One D&D to give more specifics on the OGL or System Reference Document (SRD) at this time."The fact that they wouldn't come out to say that they WILL have an OGL/SRD that is freely available is a bad sign if anything. To me, this reeks of a pivot to force 3PP and homebrew integration to use the exclusive platform they're building. If they actually intended to support actual OGL/SRD support and to tamp down the fearmongering they would/should have done so in a FAR less vague manner.
This is why I am concerned about Hasbro/Wizards causing a backlash (i.e., the 4E debacle all over again).
The problem is that the people at Wizards and the people at Hasbro don't see gaming in the same way. With the economy pulling back, Hasbro may be concerned about money being given away, not really understanding how the RPG ecosystem actually works. But, the Wizards people realizing how dangerous this position is, want to create room to back-peddle. Hence the unclear message.
We will need to see what happens.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My guess is that there will be some changes, but they don't have all the details completely figured out, so don't want to share until then. Considering they haven't really officially announced that this is a new edition in the first place, it's way too early to expect real details. Once they have product announcements post playtesting (likely a year away) I wouldn't EXPECT them to have much to say about OGL.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
comicbook.com reached out for clarification and got a statement that seems to indicate an evolution of the current OGL rather than out and out removal of it.I wouldn't say that the official statement really implies that at all, it was more of a non-statement while indicating they're aware that there are concerns about it.
Right... how does the statement While it is certain our Open Game License (OGL) will continue to evolve, just as it has since its inception, we're too early in the development of One D&D to give more specifics on the OGL or System Reference Document (SRD) at this time. NOT imply an evolution of the current OGL rather than a removal of it? I mean really? How does the word evolve not imply evolution?
The problem is that the people at Wizards and the people at Hasbro don't see gaming in the same way. With the economy pulling back, Hasbro may be concerned about money being given away, not really understanding how the RPG ecosystem actually works.
Excepting of course that Hasbro's current CEO is the former CEO of WOTC and would therefore "understand the RPG ecosystem"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playtest analysis video went up today, talking about the feedback from the first packet and things to come! Next playtest goes live tomorrow, and seems to be reworks of the Aardling and Drow (who both reviewed poorly), a "special guest" of some sort, and the reworked Cleric Class.
The plan from there is to do smaller playtests than what's come so far, with first the rest of the Priest classes, then the Warriors and weapons, then lastly Mages.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The talks focused on how to "grow the brand" and how to move away from focusing on the actual game and mechanics and pivot far more into making it something they can get constant and regular income and making it a "lifestyle brand." The speakers went on rather candidly about how they very intentionally picked up D&D Beyond as a method to ensure they can drive up income and work to "give them more ways to express their fandom" and to drive as much "live service income" as possible through it.
Other interesting things of note are just HOW focused they really are on converting players into customers via D&D Beyond and their other future platforms to push these users into "recurrent spending" by way of adding "options to create rewarding experiences post-sale."
Overall, the shareholder meeting with the actual leadership more or less went full "mask off" about how they treat the game as a commodity to sell merch, DLC, movies/shows, props/toys, expand the Brand Licencing to other products, sell add-ons, subscriptions, and to expand D&D into the digital arena with almost a singular focus.
They also had somebody on the line who was talking up thelast MtG set they put out that fans HATED as it was apparently the most profitable set ever despite how poorly it was met by consumers. They also spoke about how they want to focus on a 4-quadrant strategy via Movies, Video Games, Merch/Props/Collectables (aimed at "casual fans"), and also Digital. Notably absent from the strategy that the WotC head spoke about was ... the actual GAME, they spent more time talking about subs, merch, licensing, the D&D movie, smartphone Apps, and name recognition/awareness in order to make things that are not even One D&D at all... or rather, it can only be viewed as focusing no the game itself if you consider that One D&D will be aimed at and sold almost exclusively as a digital product/live service rather than as an actual TTRPG.
Sure it was a shareholder meeting and as such, it was always going to focus on "okay but how is this going to make us more money" so much of what was discussed was absolutely going to have to be aimed at that but the sheer amount of effort they sunk into answering questions that pushed aside the game itself versus talking about how they can "convert" more fans than ever before into paying customers for things that are NOT the actual game itself was mind-blowing. They are very much treating it like a cash cow and trying to do everything possible to extract as much value from the brand while at the same time being careful not to emphasize the core of what D&D is at ALL in their discussions, a game.
I'm not shocked by this at all, but I must say I AM very disappointed that even despite the leadership being raised up from the ranks the entire focus of HASBRO and WotC itself is simply how to spin D&D AWAY from being a TTRPG and making it a "lifestyle brand" which, if speaking only for myself, is just downright disgustingly greedy and disrespectful of the creatives and game designers that build the beast this multinational corp is trying to suck dry of every bent copper they can with little to no respect for the game itself or the designer's hopes for it.
TL:DR - At this phase, from what was revealed in the meeting as well as rumblings and rumors of those working for WotC "through the grapevine" so to speak, the leadership in charge seems to ONLY care about how they can turn D&D into something they can sell in markets OTHER than traditional TTRPGs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **...
This is part of what I feared about Wizards "overreaching"
I am not sure how people feel about ClownfishTV, but they have a video on it. (approx 12min)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they are expecting us to pay a monthly fee to play D&D....they need to get their heads checked, cause that is just nuts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hah, if they think they can stop me from playing D&D for free, they are sorely mistaken! XD
Well, you did pay for the books in the first place.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not too worried about it yet - these are incomplete plans 1-2 years out. When they figure out the details and announce it, then it's time to get upset...or not.
And if the subscription is for a digital tabletop integrated with the rules - that's not out of line - most are subscription based. If it's a subscription to get all product released digitally, also not a big deal, especially if you can still buy individual ones. Might not be for everyone, but not necessarily a bad option for some people.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As soon as I saw that the OGL 1.1 news that said anyone who makes more than 750k (income or revenue? They used both terms) off a 1.1 OGL product owes them a royalty I said to my wife "They're worried about creating the next Pathfinder 1e".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As soon as I saw that the OGL 1.1 news that said anyone who makes more than 750k (income or revenue? They used both terms) off a 1.1 OGL product owes them a royalty I said to my wife "They're worried about creating the next Pathfinder 1e".
True.
However, paradoxically, this may have the effect of reinvigorating Paizo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...but people can just use OGL 1.0 still. What does 1.1 give them that would cause them to use it instead?
Near as I can tell permission to use what shows up on the "One D&D" platform. So the new changes to the rules and any Monsters that appear only on the platform. 1.0 won't cover those
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...but people can just use OGL 1.0 still. What does 1.1 give them that would cause them to use it instead?
Depending on the scope of changes, the OGL will be stuck referencing the SRD.
They may put out a new, non-OGL 1.0 SRD-equivalent that requires one to use the “new improved” license.
It would be deemed “closed content” for purposes of the OGL but usable under the new license.