The point about comparing the quality of books that WotC puts out was damning. Well said. I'll also add that most companies give you all of that quality in their book, PLUS a pdf of the book as soon as you order it. As soon as people quit giving money to a company that hates them, the better.
So glad that I never got into DnD or bought their products. I thought the PDF copy with the physical book purchase was industry standard. Everything I hear makes me shocked they've managed to hold such dominance when there's a wealth of competition that are driven by love of the hobby, and not the last few drops of profit they can squeeze out of you.
This is why I always say WotC is the worst ttrpg company with how they treat their customers. I just wish more people would see how much money WotC is squeezing out of them and support more companies that actually treat their customers properly.
Free League is getting close to taking up more shelf space in my house than 5th Edition. When I get Vassen, it's going to pass it. And the books are just BETTER. Better presentation, better rules, better overall quality. The problem with 5th Edition is a lack of "Complexity Parity" as I call it. PLAYERS have tons of options and support, but the GMs are basically told, "Guess." At least with Pathfinder 2e, it's the same level of complex on both sides. With Free League, it's the same level of "not complex" on both sides, but it also WORKS.
The most important reason that it doesn't appeal to me is that playing IRL with friends is one of the core aspects of RPGs. We only played DnD online so much the last years because we couldn't all leave the house.
WOTC won't appeal to you. They want new players who get into it because of Critical Role and Stranger Things. 6e will likely not have an OGL, and WOTC will push the vtt as the only real way to play because they'll likely stop making books and print media. They'll be some lazy af ad campaign like "If you want to truly experience the world's greatest rpg, there's only One D&D"
@@lanefunai4714 if they do that, it will be the death of D&D, and deservedly so. They will simply be ceding the TTRPG crown to Pathfinder or another game once and for all.
The main appeal of TTRPGs is genuine human connection when we're so socially isolated from each other. Not to mention a chance to use open ended creativity and imagination when most everything is manufactured. Their plan is to remove the very heart of what makes TTRPGs worthwhile. Might as well just play a video game.
@@Xaltotun Many co-op games are actually. That's not the problem. The problem is that building new campaigns is a ton of work. There's also the issue of monetization. The basic toolkit given with the original purchase will be limited while most of the stuff will be locked behind paywalls. You want this cool looking red dragon model? It's yours for only 2 bucks. Need a few new demon models for your next campaign? Go to the store, demon box for only 19,99. Etc. Microtransactions - that's what they really want.
@@HH-hd7nd Exactly. They want to sell as many virtual minis and map/set pieces and tiles as possible and they will nickel and dime players into just not caring. Additionally, I highly suspect their greed will mean they want to sell THEIR virtual minis so they get all the profit, and that is just short sighted. Allowing others to create and sell game assets and then taking a SMALL commission on the sale would do so much for the game. If their VTT was a marketplace that supported outside artists it would MASSIVELY expand the variety of what the VTT could offer players, but I suspect they will want to control it and take the potential profit for themselves and if they DO open it to outside creatives to sell on their platform I'm expecting they'll take a big chunk of the profits, or insist on the right to bundle your work into packs they sell etc.
Such a great analysis. I'm a software engineer myself and you're absolutely right, software is hard and expensive. Even for D&D Beyond web developers (and their decision makers), transitioning to a 3D project that's completely different from the base product, is not an easy endeavor.
I'm a software developer myself too and also a solutions architect and I can assure you, there's nothing software couldn't solve. And, if done right, it's actually ain't that expensive. Not cheap though and doing things right is never easy. So we'll see how they do.
Not to mention the D&D beyond site does not even have some pretty basic features and buckles under it's own weight when the DM allows home brew rules or non-magic items. Some Artificer doesn't even get all it's magic items usable for the infusions unless you buy all the other books. I've only used that thing for a month and it's probably the worst thing I have ever used. I'd rather just use 5e tools and some paper and a pencil.
WotC did have some decent software, back during 4e: - the original, "offline" Character Builder (shareable char sheets, homebrew-import support, offline so you still retained info/sheets even if your subscription lapsed), - the Encounter Builder (mix-and-match & adjust abilities to craft custom monsters), - and the D&D Compendium (searchable database of every published term/character/monster/etc). Those were genuinely well-designed from a UX perspective (functional UI & evocative aesthetics), as well as fully capable of being expanded to support user-generated/homebrew content (via fan-documented XML imports). Then they fired all those people in one of the annual staff-purges, brought on a bunch of either less-experienced staff, or contractors, rebuilt the Character Builder to be online-only using Silverlight (remember Microsoft's answer to Adobe Flash?), and dropped the Encounter Builder entirely. It's less that they can't make good software, and more that their greed & shortsightedness interfere with doing so.
Great points. Also i would like to add another great problem; The more you visualize a pen & paper RPG the greater risk is of visualizing it "wrong". Everyone has their own internal view how the world and its inhabitants look. Even if the asset library is huge, it will only take a couple of minutes of browsing through it until you realize "goblins don't look like that", "Meh, that spell effect looks horrible" or "that's not what our world looks like".
The image in my imagination is almost always way cooler than a mini, weather that mini is a physical model standing on the table in front of me or an image on a computer screen. They risk making something at the halfway point; not really a ttrpg and not really a video game... worst of both worlds.
The comment about the GM having to not just tell the story and keep the players engaged, but ALSO be the backstage manager for all of the 3D assets hit home for me. I just had my first experience running Pathfinder 2e recently, and that felt busy enough for me! That and I'd rather have the choice of using whatever leftover models I have as standins as opposed to being forced to pay for a specific asset.
The other problem it has (which may be by design) is that the DM is forced to rely on WotC stuff only. Compare to using Foundry or Roll20 where 2d Assets are freely available and there are already programs like Dungeon Draft that let you create maps quickly once you've learned the basics, especially if you've imported, say, the Forgotten Adventures asset pack (which has 70 *thousand* items in it).
Honestly, I think they'd be better off making a video game/map creator that can softlock representative assets like Minecraft and auto-generate side quests for solo adventure paths inside a world the GM can then run a party through.
I once asked my players to draw the epic location where the end of our campaign took place. The six of them all drew the bridge, the chasm, the statue, the altar, etc. in completely different ways. For me, that's the most important thing in role-playing: the creative power of imagination. That's why I don't use printed maps, battlemat, and I especially don't use 3D aids. They kill the free imagination of the players.
If you play games like D&D where positioning and movement distance matters, battle map isn't bad thing. location of objects on the battlefield also helps (your chairs, carts etc) to give players better idea what is in their reach etc. it is even a bit more important for VTTs. There is still a plenty of room for imagination and narration even with colour 2D maps and some effects on 2D maps and tokens. What is on the table is just rough estimation after all. Full picture of the battle will still be in your head. Best example of that would be battle games like Warhammer 40k. You have detailed maps with obstacles etc, detailed, well painted minis and dice will still tell a story that you could animate in your head to really epic proportions(I suggest you check channel Play On Tabletop and their 40k in 40min series). At the same time, existence of all the minis and detailed battle maps doesn't mean they are needed to have a good game. I just think whole RPG hobby is about being openminded and use what works best for you and your group.
I think there might be (at least) two additional reasons this isn't going to work out for WOTC. 1) The leadership doesn't really understand the hobby. One of the big appeals to TTRPGs is precisely that they require very little investment to get going. All you really need to participate (as a player) is a copy of the PHB and a set of dice. Everything beyond that is optional, meaning you can get into the hobby for less than $100. The very bug that the execs are complaining about (ThE bRaNd Is UnDeRmOnEtIzEd) is a feature for many of the hobby's participants. I don't care if it's only $1 per year; there is no version of the world in which I will pay a subscription to access a DnD feature. 2) WOTC is overestimating the appeal of VTTs. VTTs saw a boom during the pandemic, and they definitely have their uses, but I've never met a player who actually prefers them to in-person play, given the choice. By and large, people go to VTTs when they are, for whatever reason, unable to meet in-person; they are rarely the first choice. If the next edition of DnD really is primarily online then I think that fact alone is going to drive a huge share of the market to simply ignore it.
100% agreed. I really do think this whole 3D VTT strategy was hatched in the middle of Covid. The whole world had no idea if or when the pandemic would ever end at the time, and clearly some companies made some big plans to capitalize on a new world that turned out to be a temporary one.
I fully agree with the second point. Yet i find it funny that so many people dont realize that u can play in person AND use vtt tools as well. Best of both worlds.
To your second point, I think you may be under estimating the number of people who might have an interest in the hobby but live in an area where it's hard to find other players, or they just have no time or interest in (or don't know how to) find local players. There's also people too socially awkward to find in person player, or people who are so disabled in person play is tough, and a VTT opens up a doorway to those players. All that is to say I think VTTs are probably the only way to reach a LOT of players, and a lot of players would probably never play in person and will ONLY ever want to play VTT, especially if there are ways to easily find games to join through the VTT. VTTs still have massive potential.
Whta, you have to buy a book? In my country it's perfectly legal to share one book with the whole table and even multiple tables. Also bought PHB on sale for $20 and free shipping, such thanks JBezos for that.
@@jackobatgaming oh for sure, that's part of what I mean when I say VTTs have their uses. I just think that situation is fairly niche and WOTC is making a mistake in assuming that the majority (or even a large minority) of the player base is interested in playing that way.
As a GM for the last 47 years, I have to say that I will NOT give up my open ended creativity to dump buckets of money (I don't have) down the OneDND rabbit hole. I'm not one who uses prebuilt adventures, preferring to go either off the cuff or to build my own worlds. WotC can byte me.
The most important and essential thing against that kind of digital table, beyond having a decent computer : we play tabletop RPGs because we want real freedom. If you want a too gamey system and digital tables, maybe tabletop RPGS are not what you should really play and you should aim for video games and or board games. I don't play D&D to have an erzats of video games. Using a digital table will be such a struggle for DM and players really used to play tabletop RPGS . For instance What if the digitabl table does not allow you to properly show a player destroying the floor with his spells or sheer strength? What about actions who are not scripted by feats and power classes? Will te digital table allow those?
Great comparison to Free League's RPG books. As someone who owns a physical copy of everything Free League have ever put out for Symbaroum, The One Ring and Forbidden Lands, I'm always blown away by their quality; their books are true works of art and well made.
100%! Free League is amazing in their production values and their game concepts. My absolute favorite game company out there. With Chaosium in 2nd place just because I have been a Call of Cthulhu fan for so long. Alien, Symbaroum, Tales from the Loop, Mork Borg, Vaesen all are incredible. And I backed the Blade Runner Kickstarter and just got the books a few weeks ago. Can't wait to dive into those.
@@Miskatonic1927 I completely agree - they always seem to get it pitch perfect when it comes to the style, tone and artwork of their books. The starter sets are superb too. All I ever think with Free League is 'please just keep doing what you're doing'. I am continually tempted by Alien, Vaesen and Bladerunner but recently backed the new Forbidden Lands book and, according to a Free League video I watched a few days ago (Free League Community Q&A | January 2023) there is a new Symbaroum expansion coming, along with a new one for The One Ring and a Mines of Moria one is also on the horizon. Amazing.
Huh. I have a Coriolis book here (second hand, mind you) that's got some weird glue-spill issue along the spine.. I wonder if that's from the previous owner.
@@sirspate my hard copy of Coriolis directly from Free League looks great. Got it as an add on from the Blade Runner RPG Kickstarter. Only gave had it a few weeks and haven't had much of a chance to look at it, other than just a quick flip thru. But the spine and rest of the book are great.
All great points. Recently I saw a developer of a 3d table-top program claim that creating a 3d map is no harder or more time-consuming than using a 2d map. Except when I pressed the issue it was eventually confessed that the comparison was to "drawing" a 2d map from scratch rather than just uploading a 2d map to a VTT of your choice, and even then (as mentioned in this video) you are severely limited to the 3d assets you have paid for. A 3d VTT sounds like it should be epic, but it just doesn't work practically and never will. And this is only one of the reasons I don't plan on ever touching WotC's shiny new vtt when/if it eventually gets released.
As someone who has worked extensively in networking, that first point was always something I wondered about, ever since the news dropped. The vast majority of DND players I know do not have computers powerful enough to run this, and cloud hosting won't really solve their issues (but WILL raise prices). Hell, sometimes just running roll20 with flat assets alongside a video call makes my computer lag, and I have uncommonly good internet because of my job and never have lag on my work computer, so it's not the connection 🥲 And the time it will take for DMs to realize their imaginations in this thing....... 😬 I don't have time for a second full time job! Anyway, I just want to make NPCs up on the fly sometimes, or answer my players when they ask, "can I find a hat shop around here somewhere?" with, "Absolutely!" Without having prepped a hat shop. Add in the questionable dev and PM teams and the total mistrust of the community and I can't see how this could succeed.
And some people don’t even HAVE an actual computer either, take me for example, I’m writing this comment on an IPad, as much as I might wish I had some kind of nice fancy gaming computer, that unfortunately isn’t true for me as of now. This VTT is more than likely either gonna be DOA or devolve into yet another predatory Gacha game, as if the gaming scene wasn’t already flooded with more than enough of those…
@@caimanthechimera679 Not owning a desktop computer is the norm among younger people (mid-30s & younger). It's mobile all the way. Even the folks who own laptops wouldn't be able to do much, as most laptops don't have a dedicated GPU/graphics chip, and anything close to what WotC showed would smoke onboard graphics.
As a book and dice player you nail it at the 10:30 minute mark. The quality of any WotC products I've seen has been dreadful compared to many other publishers and in some cases worse than POD books. They produce books like junk food. Your example of Free League shows the difference perfectly. And many other publishers give you the PDF free if you buy directly or from somewhere on the Bricks And Mortar scheme.
The only use I could think of for it when I was intrigued (OGL fiasco really threw that one down the toilet), was to run specific boss encounters as a kind of special event and run most of the rest either on another user-friendly VTT or theater of the mind. I was intrigued enough to experiment with TaleSpire. However, despite the well-executed features of that 3d VTT, I found my enthusiasm deflated. I found myself asking if I was a Game Master or a Game Developer and what the line between TTRPG and video game truly was.
Yeah, it really shackles the imagination when everything has to be visualized in fancy 3D. If you don't have the asset to drop into the map, can it even exist in the fiction? Yes of course it can, but it's hard for players to fill in those gaps when everything else is rendered in brilliant 3D.
I think WOTC's entire plan has been hinging on an influx of new players brought in from the movie and TV series. They're looking to Marvel, as even though Marvel is known for comic books, comics only make up a small percentage of the total income these days, with movies and merchandising bringing home the lion's share. New players likely only have video games for comparison, so they won't miss the depth of "real D&D". Especially with as advanced as AI is getting, it could simulate a "good enough" experience that will still wow video gamers (although I agree with you that the execution will probably be lacking and underwhelming, just speaking to WOTC's hopes here). And recurrent spending environments rely on whales more than an army of dedicated consumers. As crappy as it is, Diablo Immortal is bringing in the cash that Blizzard hoped even though basically any RUclips review you see says it's an okay game with horrible over-monetization. Basically, up until the D&D Beyond boycott, WOTC was betting on the current community only accounting for a drop in the bucket for their overall consumer base, which explains why they seemed to hold the community in such low regard. They weren't concerned with upsetting us, because it's like when a really rad metal band puts out a pop hit. The metalheads all get angry, but the band is way more successful than they were with that fanbase, so they're willing to shed all the old fans in exchange for the army of new ones. Now that the OGL situation didn't go the way they expected, I'm not sure if this all is still in the current plan, but I think it's pretty obvious this was the way they were going at least. I've personally been over 5e for a couple of years now, so even if they turn a complete new leaf it still probably won't win me back, because I just like the aesthetics that other games provide better, even if 6e is just as open with the licensing.
That's basically been my theory. They wanted to get the new OGL in place so the hordes of new players they were expecting to come in after seeing the movie would have no frame of reference for a true open game environment. And they'd more than make up for the core community that has kept them in business. Of course, they failed to take into consideration that TTRPGs do not work like a video game you can just pop in and play. Those moviegoers who come out of the movie wanting to play D&D are going to go looking to their family and friends who play. The family and friends Hasbro/WotC gave the middle finger to. So yeah, there might be a significant amount of people walking out of the movie totally hyped to play D&D, but a large chunk of them will be steered to games like Pathfinder 2E, Old School Essentials, and any number of other games simply because their connections have all dumped D&D.
I just want to point out, that since v3.5, WotC has YET to deliver on a fully functional _character builder_ for any edition. 4th was _close_ but still had some horrid bugs and things that just didn't work. They never delivered the rest of that advertised platform either (admittedly, someone died, and that will hurt it, but that goes back to Dave's point on Project Management, why was the project set up with a literal SINGLE POINT of failure?). Parts of Beyond still don't work. Don't get me started on how I can't put MY FREAKING SADDLE AND SADDLEBAGS ON MY HORSE STILL! I have no confidence they can deliver on this either.
Regarding the time spent creating 3d environment and the GUI: It wont affect that many people, those will less in number who wants to create their own campaign there - mostly because it will a huge time investment. I think the official modules will have their main maps in already added into the VTT (for a fee of course), for ease of use for most players. Maybe that would be enough for the playerbase they want anyway. The next that I could envision to be included is a (steam)workshop like thing, where you can get modules and maps - maybe for a fee as well, so official modules would have buyers left. And if I am really adventurous with my thoughts I also can think about having an AI (namely a machine learning model) map builder, that turns text inputs into 3d terrain. Like "A 6 by 6 dungeon room, with a table flipped, and 3 battle ready orcs" could be turned into the needed assets that can be manipulated if needed. But that last thing (and maybe all 3) are outside WotC assumed budget.
@@DaveThaumavore I play exclusively in person games. I think WotC is planning on digital only for their next version. How dumb would it be that we all had to log in to this fancy VTT for in home games. Then WotC could finally control what happens at every table. No one is talking about the control aspect. If you don't tow the WotC line, boom, you're banned. Too bad to spent all that money on virtual carrots.
The ability to go anywhere, talk to anyone, and be as ridiculous and crazy as possible... You can't do that in books, movies and TV, or video games. They are trying to make a gate a door. They are similar but still very different.
@@jasonmountain4643 I play exclusively online due to lack of an IRL group, and a wonderful online group that fits my favored play style perfectly. But unless they manage to pull a miracle out of their butt, I'm not too worried about this impacting me. They've been fumbling the ball continuously lately, so I find that unlikely.
I can guarantee you that they want to get rid of the GM. Their VTT is going to be a platform for them to sell you pre made adventures that can be played like a multiplayer or solo online game. Yeah, they will sell you assets for you to create your own adventure if you want, but that is an afterthought.
Possible - that would fit with the current-gen problem of "not enough DMs", paid DMs, etc. Have actually read comments elsewhere from folks looking forward to that sort of thing. 🤷 I feel that might be solving the wrong problem though - should make it easier for players/interesteds to make the leap to the DM chair, rather than eliminate the need for a DM.
Just the idea of a VTT at all is a non-starter for me. My GMing style is largely based around presenting a sandbox and reacting to player choice to fill it out. When I have to go in and prep that world beforehand, it removes most of the things I enjoy about GMing and replaces them with a bunch of fiddly tedious prep work I don't want to do, and my players lose at least a little bit of their own agency in shaping that world (whether they know it or not). Not to mention that for me part of the appeal of tabletop gaming is that it's an *escape* from screen time where I can socialize with my friends and be present with them and not looking at my computer or phone for a few hours. The appeal of ttrpg's is that they're *not* video games. If I want to play video games I can do that and I don't need or particularly want D&D for it. And I think that's the problem with this emphasis on VTT. It codifies one specific GMing style as the "correct" way to run D&D and, while I can only speak for myself and my circle of friends, it's nowhere close to the way most people I know are playing the game.
My take on using VTTs has been to use the pieces that work, and leave the rest. 90% of the game time on my games use either a simple world map, or no display at all, using only the character sheet tools made available. Maps were reserved for "the big fights" if and when they were known in advance. I did eventually make a simple tool for sketching down off-the-cuff maps that basically turned a Foundry scene into a basic dry-erase board. Combine those pieces and I had 99% of my games covered. There's only one thing I did with VTTs that greatly changed how I play online, and that was being able to flesh out shopping. Being able to click a button and roll out a shopkeeper, then have the "shopping episodes" play out with some level of automation not only made it easier for players to make decisions (what was available was *mostly* what was in the shop), but also allowed more exciting RP with the actual shop keepers, as players weren't sitting around waiting while one person spent 10 minutes haggling down a price. Spending an hour making the shops was probably the best use of time I ever had, as players stayed engaged, and actually ended up with more ideas and RP than there would have been otherwise. It's the only piece I really wish could be made more useable for in-person games, as shopping trips were always the slowest part of any campaign I was in.
Spot on breakdown. I hope many eyes see this. I am one of many that want to draw maps with a pen, make monsters on an index card, and move my tokens on a map. I play RPGs to get AWAY from technology.
I play for having fun and, if done right, virtual tabletop is a great tool to have fun. We'll see if Wizards can do it right. Doing things right ain't easy.
You know what won't be fun? When you spend four hours (and $40) making a gorgeous, detailed, interactive, and compelling map for your final boss battle… and one of your players can't load it because their computer isn't new enough. Performance isn't just a you must be this tall to ride check. It depends on the assets and numbers in the scene. Game devs spend a ton of time, both theirs and computers, to optimise levels, and an amateur can't do that.
WOTC is banking on the VTT being a success. Since it is the ONLY way they can get recurring revenue from DMs and players. I forsee a basic pack for DMs at the start (a few walls, some kobolds), but everything else will have to be purchased outright or even worse: rented per week/month).
It’s going to suck hard, because Hasbro makes terrible software and they’re eliminating competition. Without outside pressure, I can’t imagine them sticking the landing. That said, it may suck and still not fail.
Yeah, I guess you're right about it sucking and still not failing. The first-party 5e books are objectively horrible and yet they still outsell the best indie and 3rd party RPG books on the market.
@@DaveThaumavore To use another WotC example, Magic Online was atrocious for twenty years and made tons of money. The only reason I think they eventually replaced it with something better was Hearthstone doing so well. As you said, they’re cheap. It kinda makes sense since Hasbro comes from the toy world, which is all about making cheap crap.
Another issue is that plenty of people run multiple rpg systems. I can run anything I want on other VTTs. I have no interest in having a VTT for D&D and a VTT for everything else.
Good one Dave! But you forgot one key point. I stopped playing video games when I started spending most of my life staring into one screen or another. Some people need VTTs because they're separated from their friends by great distances, but I think a big part of the charm of the TTRPG is that you play it around a table and not through a computer. Computers are work. The internet is a hassle. It's great what they can do but playing through a VTT seems to me like playing a game in the company breakroom. Sure, it can be done, but there are better places to do it.
I play using Discord for video chat because some of favorite gaming friends live in other states. My Alien RPG campaign i am GMing right now has 3 of the 4 players in different states. I do not use VTT because theater of the mind works nicely. I have my own Discord server and different channels for handouts and other notes and lore. Toss some map handouts, NPC pics, ship schematics, and other info into the proper channels for the scenario and all the players have access to it anytime they want. Maybe its an unpopular opinion, but I have enjoyed gaming far more now... and have GM'd and played in more games since transitioning to online during the pandemic, than I did before. And its much less of a hassle than having people over. Most of my players used to live here and we played in person but they have since moved back to their home states. If you find good players, keep them! 💯💯
@@DaveThaumavore Allowing users to create and share their work on platforms like talestavern cuts down immensely on the work. As the community continues to grow and the database of pre-made content from users gets bigger, it only gets easier and better. Yes, starting from scratch is a lot of work, but you usually don't have to, at least for Talespire.
SCAG was the red flag that made me question, just at the start of 5e, WotC's professionalism and ethics. Then came some questionable events, like the 45th anniversary dice set, the legal problems with Weiss and Hickman and subpar manuals like Strixhaven, Spelljammer, Tasha, etc. I had already stopped buying their products and into their lies and the VTT and the OGL fiasco have been just the cherry and icing on the cake. I love D&D, but I have always said that "D&D does not equal 5e or WotC". The sooner people realize this, the better. We should consider WotC as just another 3rd party creator, which now basically is, after their release of SRD under CC license: if it makes something worth our money we may buy, if it doesn't to hell with them.
@@DaveThaumavore I realized this thing only when Michael E. Shea pointed it out on his channel Sly Flourish. And it's perhaps the only decent thing coming out of this ugly story, together with the fact that many players finally opened their eyes. No matter whether WotC releases a wonderful new edition or a pile of crap, the 5e SRD is beyond the guarded walls of CC license and can now be used by any creator. And, if understand correctly how does CC works, maybe it can even be improved by building upon its foundations (e.g. new rules for handling hp and rest), if one so wishes.
As someone that's been in video game development professionally and VTT DMing as a hobby, that list is fairly spot on. Trying to balance the complexity of an accessible experience for new players with the verisimilitude that veterans of TTRPGs expect will be incredibly challenging. Additionally, content is king, and unless there are some **very** robust yet intuitive map creation tools, I expect that games will feel more like playing Solasta or Neverwinter Nights where there's definite limits on player creativity and complexity of environments. What their Store and 3PP user content sharing looks like will be a big factor to their success as well.
I'm having a hard time seeing much of a user-content sharing ecosystem for this, at least in terms of visuals. Anyone with the talent/skill to actually build out a good looking, well-made 3d model of this caliber, would either 1- want to sell it at a much higher price than most TTRPG DMs/players are likely to want to pay, or 2- quickly realize that there are other, better markets for that sort of work (Unity & Unreal stores, Artstation, etc). That also doesn't figure for the aesthetic aspect. WotC would presumably provide some kind of stock assets for folks to use - PCs, enemies, NPCs, environments, props, etc. Whether they stick to the style shown in their "totally-not 6e" trailer or not, do they expect 3rd party content creators to try to match that style, as opposed to going their own way? Do they expect players/DMs to be savvy enough to look past any aesthetic mismatches - Link in the Elder Scrolls - and if so, what tf is the selling/value proposition of this sort of visual spectacle? It just seems to me like they don't have a good grasp of who the players are, what they need/want - out of a VTT, or the experience of playing D&D, generally - and how best to achieve that in a manner that's viable & sustainable tech- & business-wise. Rather than getting an updated NwN toolset, I see this as a sh*tshow in slow motion. 🙃
@@mandisaw i was going to say something about this already being tried with NWN 1-2... glad you and MD5473 mention it. I played both of those, and really wanted the online persistent server/world/communities for them to work-out/flourish... but it never really happened. There are simple reasons for how and why it happened the way it did, but it would take too long to go into here, so i'll just say "good points" to you all in these comments.
A lot of the problems you mention are very real... from the perspective of a DM active in the TTRPG community. But from a shareholder's perspective, the community *is the problem that needs to be solved*. We are playing D&D, making stuff for the game to share amongst ourselves, without paying them. We are "undermonitized". They won't need to make the software ux flexible for DMs to use their imagination, if they can get new players and DMs to buy the Phandelver Premium Pack with all the assets you need to play their adventure within their parameters. At some point, someone at Hasbro learned that D&D was a valuable IP synonymous with the tabletop hobby... and took it to mean they could monetize the hobby itself. I agree that they will fail, but they will still make a lot of short-term money from clueless new players who have yet to realize D&D is not the beginning and end of ttrpgs. The hobby will prevail, but what shape it will be in at the end of this experiment is another question entirely.
Points well made. Our group has now left dnd for other games which I have been introduced to by your channel. I will wait for when the VTT is released but my friends and I have reasoned that all the pay per skins were inevitable if they the company is desperate to monetise it how they want. It’s a shame but we trying new stuff which is good for other developers.
Like I will say that tailspire does look nice but much like how you say, 2d vtt is just so much easier to work with. I have to applaud them and dungeon Alchemist for their 3d works.
Yeah I simply can't be bothered with making maps in tailspire. Its pretty but time consuming. I can draw a map in 30 seconds in a paint program that gets the job done just fine
@@telarr9164 Dungeon Alchemist is pretty solid for putting together a relatively quick map. Drop some dimensions, have the AI fill it out, then if you don't like the layout you can either tweak it or refresh until it works. Export, and then I can plug it into Fantasy Grounds or Roll20 and call it a day. Alas, all the other 3D VTT's and mapping programs I've backed seem to be a waste of time and money (thankfully not a lot of money on my end).
@@telarr9164 Slight learning curve (though I think it's pretty easy) and still in development, so check out their RUclips channel before buying and all that.
This is why I make my own top down maps Yeah sure it takes some time, and I can take care in adding more detail And, sure, the battle might take the same amount of time that it took to make But, it’s mine as a DM to share to my PCs, my way, no MTXs
I make my own 3d maps and it is actually easier, though takes lot steeper learning curve and also initial preparation. But, after that initial time investment, it saves a lot. I strongly advise you to try learning Blender.
@@goury I’m really keen to! But my PC needs a major overhaul rn and getting by for the last couple years on Graphics Tablets, old laptop and an IPad Pro
@@thomasace2547 you don't need uber computer to run Blender. It works on toasters and it doesn't need much of anything if you're just learning how to use it. Start learning now, buy better machine when you're ready and know what you may need for that detailed graphics with complex shaders and other VFX.
VTTs are an aid to the DM and the players to make it easier to run a game. I can see some aspects -- especially those around making it easier for DMs and players to run a game -- can be useful. However, part of the enjoyment of TTRPGs is having the DM narrate and adapt the game to the players, their characters, and the differing choices they make. For example, if a player is playing as a half-orc in Dragon Heist, the DM could make it so that the player knows Yagra and RP some interactions not scripted in the adventure. That's part of what makes TTRPGs fun and interesting to play.
The OGL was created to do exactly what you said for VTT but for adventure modules. WOTC didn't like making adventures because they sold less. The OGL allowed WOTC to write books that sold to players and DMs while the adventure content was farmed out with 3rd parties on the OGL. Their VTT needs open gaming as well, but they are that kid who gets mad they lost and takes the game ball home.
You've absolutely nailed it with this video. I've spent decades working in specialist web and software development companies and seen these 7 things happen time after time - resulting in the failure of projects and even entire businesses.
Using Foundry VTT with maps I've made in Dungeon Alchemist and Virtual Battlemap, I can't help but agree that the hours of time the One~D&D VTT maps would take would be overwhelming. As it is, two of my players had to upgrade their computers just for the 2D maps on Foundry. They would need more upgrades for Unreal 5. The Foundry mod community is fantastic. Would Hasbro even allow mods?
Great analysis. I remember the same type of software presented when 4e was announced. Did at Hasbro/WotC find the old 4e launch plans and Powerpoint slides, then decide to cast resurrection on them? If I remember correctly, it didn't turn out so great back then either.
I have a theory. The reason they're making such a visually demanding VTT is because they also want to launch on game consoles. Knowing who's I charge I would be very surprised if they want to limit the access of this VTT to just PCs, this would also go along with the idea of it being watered-down compared to other VTTs.
Not a bad idea, but the logic doesn't hold - consoles are actually constrained relative to PCs. Their hardware specs are locked-in years prior to launch, and they basically design backwards - determine the target MSRP (retail price), decide on your % markup and figure a max overhead cost, then come up with hardware that will come in at that budget. If this VTT were actually being designed for consoles, rather than eye-blisteringly detailed UE5 graphics, which realistically only PS5s could handle (if that), you'd see something more middle-of-the-road, something cool-looking but not as graphically-intensive. All they really showed was a static-render with ultra-high-res models, very fancy lighting, and a single specific environment - all of which are *way, way* beyond what the actual VTT (if it ever gets made) would ever realistically support if it's meant to be accessible & scalable to potential players/customers. A piece of software that no one can run is just not a viable product.
At this point, it's almost a tradition for even numbered editions of D&D to fail. Your analysis of the situation is spot on and I think your projections will come to pass. Fortunately, this is a rich and diverse hobby that can and will survive without Wizards. They are overdue to lose market share in this space and they have inadvertently triggered something of a renaissance that has already begun to siphon off that market share in a big way.
I didn't think 2E was a failure, was it? So, when you say "tradition," what you're really saying is a single edition, 4e, was a failure. Or have I missed something?
@@theophrastusbombastus1359 2E was a bit divisive from what I know. Coincidentally lots of its perceived issues are similar to some other early editions like obtuse, clunky rules. And also that it turned into a landlord game after a while. Wasn’t nearly as bad as 4e though.
2e most certainly did not fail. It was used for more than 10 years. It had its issues, sure, but it did not fail. Not like the huge steaming mess that was 4e.
I used tabletop simulator for the longest time because it let me have as much or as little 2d and 3d elements as i wanted to use. It felt more real with players hands and everything visible to everyone
Concerning the laborious nature of the DM workload, I imagine the intention will be Module/Adventure Path DLC, paying to have all the environments from something like Curse of Strahd developed for you. The actual fun of DMing, the creativity, will be stomped on by pre-canned adventures
I see this happening to, And I can't wait for players to complain because it will be to "railroady". Because it will only be a set number of maps included in the adventure.
I like Table Top Simulator. For $15 you get infinite assets that can be modified infinite ways. Steep learning curve and a bit clunky but few limits. Took me months just to understand what it can do. Look at the Star-Wars assets if you want your mind blown.
Yeah I gave TTS the old college try. I gave up after a couple of weeks of struggling with the interface. But I've definitely seen people does amazing stuff on that platform.
When I saw that they were going all-in on a 3D-only VTT I laughed so hard. It was painfully clear to me that Wizards’ didn’t actually understand their own game or TTRPGs in general.
It is an honor to see our 3d VTT in this video. I'd like to comment that it is possible to create a tavern and then go down to the cellar. I mean we are now implementing "levels". The problem with that is that even if we do add "going down" and not just "going up" into floor levels, it will never be truly practical. VTT's and Worldbuilders in our humble opinion need to help the actual "tt rpg" gameplay. Adding, for instance, the basement of the said Tavern into a new tab rather than another level in the same tab, helps the DM to decide which players see which tab. So overall, at the end of the day, the dungeon master will not like to add that basement or the upper floor in the same scene because VTTs have no use when they try to replicate video games. They will prefer to create different tabs (like in roll20) in case some members of the party never go down and just wait upstairs. We will have the floor system by next month, but we truly believe that people will eventually not really use it. The reason we are doing it though is that many requested it and the way we built our architecture allows us to do it. Thumbs up for the video and many thank yous.
On your Software is not their Wheelhouse point, I'd go further. They'll be subject to Gall's Law - "A complex system that works inevitably evolved from a simple system that works; corollary, you cannot get to a complex system that works in one step." I bet, though, that they plan to go this route as they intend to sell extra 3D assets as part of the plan to get to 'correct' monetization levels.
Very nicely laid out. I think it will fail as what most of us think of as a VTT, but it will probably find an audience, especially with younger and less experienced D&D players, as a sort of strange D&D inspired video game. To seasoned players, I don't think it can bring the feeling of TTRPGs and will be ignored. But I hesitate to think it will crash and burn. There are so many of these play to win mobile games that make tons of money by preying on those who are susceptible to the gambling-like tactics used to keep them spending money. As a proper TTRPG tool, I think it's DOA, but it does have a chance to be profitable, just not the way it's currently being marketed.
RPG is not online gaming. Mobile gamers won't have the patience to make 3D adventures. There are also actual 3D RP video games that focus on story but they don't work that well in co-op to be honest(at least from my experience). And you will still need DMs to run said adventures. So even if that new VTT attracts players, it will still struggle to attract DMs. And DMs already have plenty of work with prep etc as is. The need for DMs and their investment to run will be what sinks this VTT more then all the other issues. All the bad schemes that still made money, pretty much run themselves and depend on psychological tactics to keep people invested. Without DMs, there are no games to be invested in, no matter what tricks you try to use.
@@Mithguar I totally agree that without DMs, it won't be used the way most RPG players expect to play. But I heard rumor that they are planning on using automated DMs for basic adventures. That sounds boring to me, it will probably be a bland railroad. But that doesn't mean people won't consume it. It will just be a different audience, and we're not part of it. It's a no go for me, but I've seen too many "garbage" apps do well just because of the marketing to naive players.
Honestly, I think their VTT is going to be basically WotC's Mansions of Madness. At best, DM's will have little to no assets to work with unless they are willing to just run official adventures. For all we know WotC's plan is to jack up the price of books while keeping much of the game exclusive to the VTT. I don't think they're leaving the TTRPG scene just yet (even though they should, based on what they want), but I doubt they have much future in the space.
You nailed it. WOTC has killed their TTRPG revenue stream. The VTT will not deliver. They will be left with true video games and media in movie and streaming/TV form, plus a few toys. That may be enough to compensate for the RPG losses, but who knows? 🙏🎲
I think they would have a better chance if they bought Talespire like they bought DnDBeyond, but I'm glad they didn't because Talespire is actually good and it has more options like running a cyberpunk game or other fantasy system. Not to mention it takes FOREVER to make a map for what could be a 10 minute encounter.
Great video! I think you’re right, and I kind of hope so too. I really don’t believe that micro transactions have a place in TTRPGs even if they’re played on a VTT, it just stinks of corporate greed to me.
I agree with all your points. It seems that the trust between WotC and the biggest spending section of the D&D/TTRPG world (DMs) has been shaken quite alot with the OGL-debacle. There's now a bunch of 5e forks and/or other fantasy RPGs that are gunning for the title of "D&D" (and I'm not too much into OSR, which probably has a ton of contenders as well). During 4th it was Pathfinder. Currently, I'm just waiting on who becomes "D&D".
@@DaveThaumavore Oh certainly on both. I'm hoping people will diversify even beyond fantasy into all sorts of weird and cool RPG stuff, though I don't necessarily see most casual audiences move away from a single game to default to.
I've been calling them Wizards On The Cheap ever since their entire marketing campaign for Avernus was to get live play troupes around the world to play out scenarios and paid them in schwaggg. I'm surprised they didnt run a contest first, coulda saved on the schwagg:).
Agreed. This is the main problem I have with VTT's. My group has been looking into TaleSpire as a way to run our game.... but I am not really interested in it. The way I want to make my games is that I want to design everything. That way I know what every cupboard includes. I know where every potion is. I know where every sword and coin purse is. What TaleSpire forces me to do is to not only make all of that, but also make it in 3D with assets that exist within TaleSpire. It just isn't a workload I can handle without burning myself out. I have a day job after all. I do not think I will be using OneD&D and its VTT. I just want a easy to use VTT where I have access to what I want that can control what the players see and not see. If my workload become to much or that I am forced to pay loads of money, I simply can not continue playing the game.
Interesting. You showed video of Neverwinter Nights, but associated said video with Sword Coast Legends. Neverwinter Nights Extended Edition is the only Virtual Table Top you need. That game, literally, has decades of fan generated custom content, it is 2.5 D, runs on your phone, has a powerful dungeon master client and is widely available.
I backed TaleSpire. It's a wonderful software, very fun to play around with. Did I ever ran a game with it? Nope. TTRPG are and will always be, to me, a social game that requires pen, dice, minis (or not), chips and human beings to be sitting next to each other and sharing a moment. I already have tons of video games for what they envision and it already works great, thanks.
I use Talespire all of the time it's a fantastic VTT even at its early access stage. It will be joining us when we are back in the same space. Just a different style of play. The user created boards and slabs reduce prep time immensely. I agree that WotC will fail here. VTTs arent going anywhere though.
One thing not mentioned, much of DND is improvising. Setting up a 2D tabletop is far more simple than 3D and in that you need only to download images to put in and online it can take a minute of downtime to find a character portrait or location. In 3D adapting and improvising is far more difficult as not only is it more time consuming but getting 3D objects will all be in house and will have to comply with whatever standards WOTC sets up.
I have an international group so we use a VTT. Your point about player hardware is insurmountable and is the main reason this whole idea is DOA. We started using Tabletop Simulator, but none of us had a PC with anywhere near enough grunt to actualy run that VTT without melting. We now use Roll20. If WotC think most players even have the kit to access there walled garden they're delusional.
Don't worry about map prep time for the new VTT is likely you won't be able to make custom maps anyway you'll only be able to use the maps they make or you'll have to buy maps from third-party creators that are going to be forced into some kind of agreement that gives WotC 50+ percent of the cost meaning you'll be paying probably $20 plus per map so the creator that spent extensive amount of hours making a decent map can get a little bit of value from that time spent
Hasbro/WotC being cheap with their productions has one major reason: Their upper level management is completely overpaid. There was an investigation by one of the shareholders which found out that they pay themselves higher wages than even Apple management. Imagine the hubris of paying yourself a wage greater than what a tech industry giant gets when you're a (failing) toy company.
I guess that an option to save this project is to offer a complete product not open to changes or many options and DM-less, this is my idea: Take the board games advance system and turn them into a virtual experience. I love those game, had them all but due to covid I was force to sell them, I will not mind to buy them again in a virtual room, I mean the idea looks super cool and can be expanded, let say we got Wrath of Ashardalon with all the minis looking increaible in color and with a nice inferface with voice over, and animation between chapters, etc. Yet it will only be that if you want to play another adventure, then we buy Castle Ravenloft or Temple of evil, etc.
You forgot to mention that the VTT will require both DMs & players to pay for a subscriptions and that the lower tiers of the subscription model STILL does not allow for Home brewing or a live DM. Instead all players will have to suffer an AI DM, and railroaded adventures. All other points are spot on. D&D 6E is DOA in my opinion, and it will absolutely lose its market share for the brand. I’m not sure which game system will over take it, probably not one out yet.
The one thing your analysis leaves out is speculation about the role AI might play in WOTC's plans. My suspicion is that they're probably developing some sort of AI sandboxing tool that will initially assist the DM in creating environments, and then replace the DMs entirely. I also think they're thinking about D&D as an elaborate "choose your own adventure" flowchart. In other words, they're fundamentally misunderstanding how tabletop roleplaying games actually work. In their perception, all they've got to do is built an elaborate sandbox filled with every option gameplay might demand. They think D&D is a video game. Maybe AI will ramp up sufficiently in the next year to be viable as a DM. But also remember that the Hasbro and WOTC brass don't actually regard current D&D players as the bulk of their target market. They want low level video gamers as their market. People who will accept point and click sandpit gaming.
I agree that they fundamentally don't understand TTRPGs. Certainly there are some people at the company who do. Most of them, probably. But people like Cynthia Williams and Chris Cao appear to be completely ignorant of the nature of the game style.
Insightful and relevant commentary. Thanks for your efforts in putting this together. This articulates all the stumbling blocks I have been mulling over re: DMing in a virtual space.
Tried to set up a 5e game on Roll20 for some old friends. Good support for the interactive character sheet but the system itself (while fine) still had a foreign object vibe. Went forward with prep for a 1e game instead. Decent character sheet, adding custom macros was straightforward enough, and there is one active+enthusiastic developer for it, but playing on a VTT felt out of place with respect to the vintage rules. Decided to just use Discord for teleconference and roll real dice on our individual tables. Will draw the map on a shared whiteboard and that’s it.
The issue with GM prep is real for a lot of VTT's. Like.... it's cool and all having a fancy 3d map. If you have some big battle about to happen that's great. Except when you put in all that time and your players completely go to a different area you haven't prepped. Sometimes simple and theater of the mind is just more feasible.
I had the exact same thoughts when I saw the promo footage. "This wil be so cumbersome on the GM's end that you'd have to buy every asset just to save time," not to mention the hardware requirements of something that looks so gorgeous. It's going to be a fun month watching what happens when this drops.
When they were asked at the creator’s summit in early April if the VTT could be run on slower computers, they responded “Is that something you want?” They are completely clueless.
I would like to point out the whole rent vs. own situation. "Buying" books on D&DBeyond or VTT assests is all rented. Once the platform is toast, so are your purchases. I have seen many official digital products over the years. It never takes long for them to stop support or updates. Then, once again, your investment is toast. Anyone else remember the digital "Core Rules" or the "Forgotten Realms Interactive Maps"?
I think point two is actually an important part of the business model. If we're playing tabletop, I can make up a vampire game without buying the Strahd book if I don't want to shell out the money and the reviews are bad. It's literally as easy as sitting down and jotting down some notes , and maybe playing the game with dim lights and candles at the table, wearing a Van Helsing costume. However, if I'm playing in a VTT, it becomes much harder for me to put together and maps and assets and monsters, so I have an even greater incentive to cave and pay Wizards obscene amounts of money for some half-baked maps that I didn't have to make myself. I think it's a great way for Wizards to funnel people into buying their products, even those of us who avoid their products because we don't think they deliver quality. Just make the game so hard that people pay for convenience. I've been skeptical of VTTs since the first ones came out, and I've never DMed with one. I've played in one twice, and it added nothing to my experience. If anything, it distracted some of my fellow players. I don't play with minis, either; I have some army men and chess pieces I scavenged from some yard sale crawls that work just fine if we need to map out positioning on the table for some reason. The game happens in my head, and I find anything physical to be either limiting what I can imagine (what do I do when my lovingly painted dwarf miniature that carries a hammer finds the Axe of the Dwarven Lords? Buy and paint a new mini?) or unnecessarily expensive and time consuming. Theatre of the mind ftw.
Trading imagination for visual immersion is a tight rope. The balance of tabletop vs video game is tricky. Hasbro & WotC have not been through the growing pains or earned the wisdom gained from the main VTT platforms. It will take a miracle to make this right. I believe that Hasbro needs to return the game back to the community and go back to doing what they are experienced at; the making and distribution of physical toys. The initial announcement and the playtest already implied disaster and major concerns for the community. I had a feeling that someone tried to make the case for an internal VTT platform based on Covid-19 era data, too little too late. Fire THAT person.
The surge of online D&D during the pandemic may have made a lot of people think online is a great way to play .. & it is! The convenience of not leaving your house is very tempting & we have got a bit lazy I think. Once you start playing in-person again you will realise how much better it is. Putting miniatures on the table, making scenery out of foam, giving physical handouts of letters on tea stained paper, standing up & pacing the room in dilemma. Virtual is a good tool & substitute, but its not REAL D&D. Just as facetime is not the same as going to the pub with your mates.
Full agreement on all points. A few more notes: First of all a couple of to-be-fair caveats re 2 and 3: While it's obviously much easier to create your own sufficiently fancy maps with 2D tools than with 3D ones, most just either draw simple grid dungeons or use pretty maps provided by others, which are roughly equal GM effort for both 2D and 3D. Of course, ready-made 3D maps ought to cost considerably more, given the increased effort for those that ultimately have to create them. The VTT for D&D4e probably would've been underwhelming, anyway, based on all the other - far less ambitious - digital tools getting canned as well, but it got canceled for... different reasons. And while they let MTG Online languish with severely outdated graphics and UI, MTG Arena looks quite good and plays about as quickly as possible. Doesn't erase its plethora of issues, though. As for Sword Coast Legends, I remember a dev team that wanted to do more, limited by budget constraints and market assumptions of executives imposing a cheap, dumbed down experience. Re 4: The hardest facepalm, of course, is that they just canceled most of their recently started fully fledged D&D video game projects, presumably so they wouldn't compete with their D&D VTT. Re 7: Having read the "OGL" 1.1, I frankly find it hard to believe they even wanted 3PP in their VTT, to begin with. Just more greedy foolishness on their part. I guess they forgot about TF2 skins.
8: This VTT is going to cost people alot of money. Something that 41 years of playing RPG's has taught me...gamers are broke. One of the reasons RPG's are so popular among people with little discretionary money is that they can have unlimited fun with a single book (or pirated PDF if they don't have 2 dimes to rub together). If these people don't have the money, they will not pay obscene amounts of money no matter how good the VTT is.
those people are not the target audience, they target normies with money that got into dnd with stranger things and critical role since being nerd is hip today, they are purposedly alienating their long time customers
Год назад+1
I bought Icewind dale on roll20. It was already pre-installed and the quality was good. It saved 80% of the work as a GM to do something of that size. Even though roll20 has a good DnD character sheet you still have to manually enter most non basic power for your character. This is both good and bad meaning it's more work but also means you can do whatever. If they do not let a very high amount of customization be possible due to micro transaction (think dnd beyond) I don't think it will do well.
The only way I see their VTT working is if it had some kind of user friendly asset generator ala Spore or Mario Maker, with a corresponding market place where creators could share what they've made with other subscribers. You'd get a ton of terrible stuff, but if it had useful key words and a good rating system I imagine there would be plenty of people (not just DMs) generating assets that anyone could use. WotC could charge their subscription fee and maybe sell optional professionally made maps and characters along side official books. There could even be theme packs that give users more stuff to play with when they make things beyond the basic free tools, as long as you don't have to buy the theme packs to use content created with them. I don't think Wizards is capable of making such a thing well, but if they could this would make them a lot of money.
Not sure if the concern about hardware limitations is a thing. Modern games for PC almost always have options to control the level of detail to accommodate weaker computer systems. That being said, the boycotting of WotC will greatly impact sales and subscriptions even if the VTTRPG software is perfect in every way.
The fact that it’s 3D shows how out of touch they are. Not only is it unimmersive for most people as it feels like a board game, but it will be impossible to run for most people. 2D with some fun animations like fireballs flying over the map is all they had to do.
Год назад+14
I enjoy 2d vtts because I lack thr skill for irl 3d terrain but am able to make very nice maps in foundry. But sometimes I also enjoy just a table with nothing but some sounds playing in the background. I share your opinion on 3d vtts. To much work for little reward.
I have trouble with making maps in foundry. Did you just persist until you had a breakthrough or is there an addon that makes it easier?
Год назад+1
@@rorysimpson8716 I had to learn how to scale tthem so you can use the grid, i also like to use the DF Architect series of modules to make things easier. I don't "draw" the maps in fvtt, i only wall them there, for map creation i use Dungeondraft or maps from patreons I support.
@@rorysimpson8716 You can try rpgmap, it lets you export the maps you create with a specific pixel per square ratio. Just put them in Foundry and change the Foundry scene pixep per square ratio to the same you exported the map. Fits like a glove
Remember... one of their own investors came out on Twitter and called them "leaderless." They are going to fail on this hard and I am looking forward to that schadenfreude.
Solid video. Another thing I'd thought of is its a bit late as far as VTTs go. Most people who are going to use a VTT are already using one and probably have been for years. I personally have been using tabletop simulator for like 8-9 years now and have 900+ hours of running for my friends who don't live near me. I've got literally no reason to go to a paid service that provides me with a (likely) inferior product. Also feels bad putting the good PS2 Dark Alliance box art over the trashy gameplay of the game that released a few years ago haha.
I think if WotC pivoted to a 2D VTT, they might be able to covert a lot of people over. But they're so greedy that maybe it would still be a miserable experience.
I'm a pen and paper GM/player. Nothing will ever replace physical play in my mind. Yes, it's a shame for people who can't play live, and I love that technology has allowed people to play remotely. I'm glad that people can play TTRPGs even if they can't meet in person, but in-person play is the ideal.
I wanted to be optimistic, but… you’re right. With their track record, why would this product be any different than the several failed projects they’ve tried to do in the past
2D is also doable in a 3D environment - it's just a layer using a flat plane. I think they do need to make sure that is good enough for filling the cracks for all the pieces still in development.
A problem not touched on regarding 3D assets - if they allow anyone to put assets up for sale through OneDnD, you're most likely going to see lots of 3D assets available for purchase, and most of them will be stolen assets. How will WotC deal with that when the lawyers come calling? That attempt at a new OGL didn't look like it left much wiggle room for them to claim they didn't know the asset was stolen, given how much they were banging on about policing the DnD space for bad actors...
2:08 Hardware (or internet) Requirements 3:40 Hard on GMs trying to prep 5:05 Software isn't their wheelhouse 7:06 It would be like a laborious money-draining video game 8:30 They won't get the complexity right 10:16 Wizards of the Coast is cheap 11:12 WotC is not to be trusted
Even if they were to overcome all of these challenges, I don’t see the end product being more fun than a MMORPG. There plan seems to have almost all of the shortcomings of MMORPGs, with few of the advantages, while removing all the comparative advantages found in TTRPGs, such as extreme, instant flexibility.
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
The point about comparing the quality of books that WotC puts out was damning. Well said. I'll also add that most companies give you all of that quality in their book, PLUS a pdf of the book as soon as you order it. As soon as people quit giving money to a company that hates them, the better.
Yeah I forgot to mention the whole PDF thing. That's huge. WotC doesn't even make PDFs. What a joke.
So glad that I never got into DnD or bought their products. I thought the PDF copy with the physical book purchase was industry standard. Everything I hear makes me shocked they've managed to hold such dominance when there's a wealth of competition that are driven by love of the hobby, and not the last few drops of profit they can squeeze out of you.
This is why I always say WotC is the worst ttrpg company with how they treat their customers. I just wish more people would see how much money WotC is squeezing out of them and support more companies that actually treat their customers properly.
Free League is getting close to taking up more shelf space in my house than 5th Edition. When I get Vassen, it's going to pass it.
And the books are just BETTER. Better presentation, better rules, better overall quality.
The problem with 5th Edition is a lack of "Complexity Parity" as I call it. PLAYERS have tons of options and support, but the GMs are basically told, "Guess." At least with Pathfinder 2e, it's the same level of complex on both sides. With Free League, it's the same level of "not complex" on both sides, but it also WORKS.
My thoughts exactly 💯
The most important reason that it doesn't appeal to me is that playing IRL with friends is one of the core aspects of RPGs. We only played DnD online so much the last years because we couldn't all leave the house.
Literally this.
WOTC won't appeal to you. They want new players who get into it because of Critical Role and Stranger Things. 6e will likely not have an OGL, and WOTC will push the vtt as the only real way to play because they'll likely stop making books and print media. They'll be some lazy af ad campaign like "If you want to truly experience the world's greatest rpg, there's only One D&D"
@@lanefunai4714 Most accurate and succint comment on the subject I've read.
That last ad is spot on.
@@lanefunai4714 if they do that, it will be the death of D&D, and deservedly so. They will simply be ceding the TTRPG crown to Pathfinder or another game once and for all.
@@SithCats they don't want a ttrpg, they want a vttrpg.
The main appeal of TTRPGs is genuine human connection when we're so socially isolated from each other. Not to mention a chance to use open ended creativity and imagination when most everything is manufactured. Their plan is to remove the very heart of what makes TTRPGs worthwhile. Might as well just play a video game.
It's hard to monetize a human connection. So they want to push us to do everything online, where they can charge us for every little thing.
Divinity original sin 2 is great to play 1 to 4 players.
@@Xaltotun Many co-op games are actually. That's not the problem.
The problem is that building new campaigns is a ton of work.
There's also the issue of monetization. The basic toolkit given with the original purchase will be limited while most of the stuff will be locked behind paywalls. You want this cool looking red dragon model? It's yours for only 2 bucks. Need a few new demon models for your next campaign? Go to the store, demon box for only 19,99. Etc. Microtransactions - that's what they really want.
I don't have any friends to play ttrpgs with
@@HH-hd7nd Exactly. They want to sell as many virtual minis and map/set pieces and tiles as possible and they will nickel and dime players into just not caring. Additionally, I highly suspect their greed will mean they want to sell THEIR virtual minis so they get all the profit, and that is just short sighted. Allowing others to create and sell game assets and then taking a SMALL commission on the sale would do so much for the game. If their VTT was a marketplace that supported outside artists it would MASSIVELY expand the variety of what the VTT could offer players, but I suspect they will want to control it and take the potential profit for themselves and if they DO open it to outside creatives to sell on their platform I'm expecting they'll take a big chunk of the profits, or insist on the right to bundle your work into packs they sell etc.
Reason 8: You are always one rules update away from having your character build or even your whole character trashed.
Such a great analysis. I'm a software engineer myself and you're absolutely right, software is hard and expensive. Even for D&D Beyond web developers (and their decision makers), transitioning to a 3D project that's completely different from the base product, is not an easy endeavor.
I'm a software developer myself too and also a solutions architect and I can assure you, there's nothing software couldn't solve.
And, if done right, it's actually ain't that expensive.
Not cheap though and doing things right is never easy.
So we'll see how they do.
Not to mention the D&D beyond site does not even have some pretty basic features and buckles under it's own weight when the DM allows home brew rules or non-magic items. Some Artificer doesn't even get all it's magic items usable for the infusions unless you buy all the other books. I've only used that thing for a month and it's probably the worst thing I have ever used. I'd rather just use 5e tools and some paper and a pencil.
WotC did have some decent software, back during 4e:
- the original, "offline" Character Builder (shareable char sheets, homebrew-import support, offline so you still retained info/sheets even if your subscription lapsed),
- the Encounter Builder (mix-and-match & adjust abilities to craft custom monsters),
- and the D&D Compendium (searchable database of every published term/character/monster/etc).
Those were genuinely well-designed from a UX perspective (functional UI & evocative aesthetics), as well as fully capable of being expanded to support user-generated/homebrew content (via fan-documented XML imports).
Then they fired all those people in one of the annual staff-purges, brought on a bunch of either less-experienced staff, or contractors, rebuilt the Character Builder to be online-only using Silverlight (remember Microsoft's answer to Adobe Flash?), and dropped the Encounter Builder entirely.
It's less that they can't make good software, and more that their greed & shortsightedness interfere with doing so.
Great points.
Also i would like to add another great problem;
The more you visualize a pen & paper RPG the greater risk is of visualizing it "wrong". Everyone has their own internal view how the world and its inhabitants look. Even if the asset library is huge, it will only take a couple of minutes of browsing through it until you realize "goblins don't look like that", "Meh, that spell effect looks horrible" or "that's not what our world looks like".
Totally. When you render everything in complex 3D visuals, you really box in the imagination of everyone participating.
The image in my imagination is almost always way cooler than a mini, weather that mini is a physical model standing on the table in front of me or an image on a computer screen. They risk making something at the halfway point; not really a ttrpg and not really a video game... worst of both worlds.
I totally agree with this.
Imagine having to use a halfling mini that looks like the halfling in The Players' Handbook.
@@foxtrotalphaone haha! I never thought about that. What a nightmare.
The comment about the GM having to not just tell the story and keep the players engaged, but ALSO be the backstage manager for all of the 3D assets hit home for me. I just had my first experience running Pathfinder 2e recently, and that felt busy enough for me! That and I'd rather have the choice of using whatever leftover models I have as standins as opposed to being forced to pay for a specific asset.
The other problem it has (which may be by design) is that the DM is forced to rely on WotC stuff only. Compare to using Foundry or Roll20 where 2d Assets are freely available and there are already programs like Dungeon Draft that let you create maps quickly once you've learned the basics, especially if you've imported, say, the Forgotten Adventures asset pack (which has 70 *thousand* items in it).
@@luketfer oh man, dungeon draft is so great. It singlehandedly saved my Pathfinder campaign during lockdown when we had to go on roll20
Honestly, I think they'd be better off making a video game/map creator that can softlock representative assets like Minecraft and auto-generate side quests for solo adventure paths inside a world the GM can then run a party through.
I once asked my players to draw the epic location where the end of our campaign took place. The six of them all drew the bridge, the chasm, the statue, the altar, etc. in completely different ways. For me, that's the most important thing in role-playing: the creative power of imagination. That's why I don't use printed maps, battlemat, and I especially don't use 3D aids. They kill the free imagination of the players.
If you play games like D&D where positioning and movement distance matters, battle map isn't bad thing. location of objects on the battlefield also helps (your chairs, carts etc) to give players better idea what is in their reach etc. it is even a bit more important for VTTs. There is still a plenty of room for imagination and narration even with colour 2D maps and some effects on 2D maps and tokens. What is on the table is just rough estimation after all. Full picture of the battle will still be in your head.
Best example of that would be battle games like Warhammer 40k. You have detailed maps with obstacles etc, detailed, well painted minis and dice will still tell a story that you could animate in your head to really epic proportions(I suggest you check channel Play On Tabletop and their 40k in 40min series).
At the same time, existence of all the minis and detailed battle maps doesn't mean they are needed to have a good game. I just think whole RPG hobby is about being openminded and use what works best for you and your group.
I think there might be (at least) two additional reasons this isn't going to work out for WOTC.
1) The leadership doesn't really understand the hobby. One of the big appeals to TTRPGs is precisely that they require very little investment to get going. All you really need to participate (as a player) is a copy of the PHB and a set of dice. Everything beyond that is optional, meaning you can get into the hobby for less than $100. The very bug that the execs are complaining about (ThE bRaNd Is UnDeRmOnEtIzEd) is a feature for many of the hobby's participants. I don't care if it's only $1 per year; there is no version of the world in which I will pay a subscription to access a DnD feature.
2) WOTC is overestimating the appeal of VTTs. VTTs saw a boom during the pandemic, and they definitely have their uses, but I've never met a player who actually prefers them to in-person play, given the choice. By and large, people go to VTTs when they are, for whatever reason, unable to meet in-person; they are rarely the first choice. If the next edition of DnD really is primarily online then I think that fact alone is going to drive a huge share of the market to simply ignore it.
100% agreed. I really do think this whole 3D VTT strategy was hatched in the middle of Covid. The whole world had no idea if or when the pandemic would ever end at the time, and clearly some companies made some big plans to capitalize on a new world that turned out to be a temporary one.
I fully agree with the second point. Yet i find it funny that so many people dont realize that u can play in person AND use vtt tools as well. Best of both worlds.
To your second point, I think you may be under estimating the number of people who might have an interest in the hobby but live in an area where it's hard to find other players, or they just have no time or interest in (or don't know how to) find local players. There's also people too socially awkward to find in person player, or people who are so disabled in person play is tough, and a VTT opens up a doorway to those players. All that is to say I think VTTs are probably the only way to reach a LOT of players, and a lot of players would probably never play in person and will ONLY ever want to play VTT, especially if there are ways to easily find games to join through the VTT. VTTs still have massive potential.
Whta, you have to buy a book?
In my country it's perfectly legal to share one book with the whole table and even multiple tables.
Also bought PHB on sale for $20 and free shipping, such thanks JBezos for that.
@@jackobatgaming oh for sure, that's part of what I mean when I say VTTs have their uses. I just think that situation is fairly niche and WOTC is making a mistake in assuming that the majority (or even a large minority) of the player base is interested in playing that way.
As a GM for the last 47 years, I have to say that I will NOT give up my open ended creativity to dump buckets of money (I don't have) down the OneDND rabbit hole. I'm not one who uses prebuilt adventures, preferring to go either off the cuff or to build my own worlds. WotC can byte me.
The most important and essential thing against that kind of digital table, beyond having a decent computer : we play tabletop RPGs because we want real freedom. If you want a too gamey system and digital tables, maybe tabletop RPGS are not what you should really play and you should aim for video games and or board games. I don't play D&D to have an erzats of video games. Using a digital table will be such a struggle for DM and players really used to play tabletop RPGS . For instance What if the digitabl table does not allow you to properly show a player destroying the floor with his spells or sheer strength? What about actions who are not scripted by feats and power classes? Will te digital table allow those?
Agreed. It really goes against the whole spirit of TTRPGs. Incredible if you think about how much money they've thrown at this thing.
Great comparison to Free League's RPG books. As someone who owns a physical copy of everything Free League have ever put out for Symbaroum, The One Ring and Forbidden Lands, I'm always blown away by their quality; their books are true works of art and well made.
100%!
Free League is amazing in their production values and their game concepts.
My absolute favorite game company out there. With Chaosium in 2nd place just because I have been a Call of Cthulhu fan for so long.
Alien, Symbaroum, Tales from the Loop, Mork Borg, Vaesen all are incredible. And I backed the Blade Runner Kickstarter and just got the books a few weeks ago. Can't wait to dive into those.
@@Miskatonic1927 I completely agree - they always seem to get it pitch perfect when it comes to the style, tone and artwork of their books. The starter sets are superb too. All I ever think with Free League is 'please just keep doing what you're doing'. I am continually tempted by Alien, Vaesen and Bladerunner but recently backed the new Forbidden Lands book and, according to a Free League video I watched a few days ago (Free League Community Q&A | January 2023) there is a new Symbaroum expansion coming, along with a new one for The One Ring and a Mines of Moria one is also on the horizon. Amazing.
Huh. I have a Coriolis book here (second hand, mind you) that's got some weird glue-spill issue along the spine.. I wonder if that's from the previous owner.
@@sirspate my hard copy of Coriolis directly from Free League looks great. Got it as an add on from the Blade Runner RPG Kickstarter. Only gave had it a few weeks and haven't had much of a chance to look at it, other than just a quick flip thru. But the spine and rest of the book are great.
100% This is the video that has needed to be made about WotC's VTT 6e strategy. Thank you for being the one to make it.
All great points. Recently I saw a developer of a 3d table-top program claim that creating a 3d map is no harder or more time-consuming than using a 2d map. Except when I pressed the issue it was eventually confessed that the comparison was to "drawing" a 2d map from scratch rather than just uploading a 2d map to a VTT of your choice, and even then (as mentioned in this video) you are severely limited to the 3d assets you have paid for.
A 3d VTT sounds like it should be epic, but it just doesn't work practically and never will. And this is only one of the reasons I don't plan on ever touching WotC's shiny new vtt when/if it eventually gets released.
I love how you recounted the events of OGL 1.0 in a future proof way. Excellent coverage!
Thanks for recognizing that!
As someone who has worked extensively in networking, that first point was always something I wondered about, ever since the news dropped. The vast majority of DND players I know do not have computers powerful enough to run this, and cloud hosting won't really solve their issues (but WILL raise prices). Hell, sometimes just running roll20 with flat assets alongside a video call makes my computer lag, and I have uncommonly good internet because of my job and never have lag on my work computer, so it's not the connection 🥲 And the time it will take for DMs to realize their imaginations in this thing....... 😬 I don't have time for a second full time job! Anyway, I just want to make NPCs up on the fly sometimes, or answer my players when they ask, "can I find a hat shop around here somewhere?" with, "Absolutely!" Without having prepped a hat shop. Add in the questionable dev and PM teams and the total mistrust of the community and I can't see how this could succeed.
Yeah a lot of people don’t have the means or the need for a decent, modern computer. WotC will find that out the hard way I guess.
And some people don’t even HAVE an actual computer either, take me for example, I’m writing this comment on an IPad, as much as I might wish I had some kind of nice fancy gaming computer, that unfortunately isn’t true for me as of now. This VTT is more than likely either gonna be DOA or devolve into yet another predatory Gacha game, as if the gaming scene wasn’t already flooded with more than enough of those…
@@caimanthechimera679 Not owning a desktop computer is the norm among younger people (mid-30s & younger). It's mobile all the way. Even the folks who own laptops wouldn't be able to do much, as most laptops don't have a dedicated GPU/graphics chip, and anything close to what WotC showed would smoke onboard graphics.
As a book and dice player you nail it at the 10:30 minute mark.
The quality of any WotC products I've seen has been dreadful compared to many other publishers and in some cases worse than POD books.
They produce books like junk food. Your example of Free League shows the difference perfectly.
And many other publishers give you the PDF free if you buy directly or from somewhere on the Bricks And Mortar scheme.
Junk food is a good analogy. Just disposable, trashy, made of questionable ingredients.
And look at Free league's boxed sets. They are fantastic and give me everything I want as a GM.
@@xczechr Easily 60% of the ALIEN starter set is usable with the core rulebook after you are done with the starter!
The only use I could think of for it when I was intrigued (OGL fiasco really threw that one down the toilet), was to run specific boss encounters as a kind of special event and run most of the rest either on another user-friendly VTT or theater of the mind.
I was intrigued enough to experiment with TaleSpire. However, despite the well-executed features of that 3d VTT, I found my enthusiasm deflated. I found myself asking if I was a Game Master or a Game Developer and what the line between TTRPG and video game truly was.
Yeah, it really shackles the imagination when everything has to be visualized in fancy 3D. If you don't have the asset to drop into the map, can it even exist in the fiction? Yes of course it can, but it's hard for players to fill in those gaps when everything else is rendered in brilliant 3D.
I think WOTC's entire plan has been hinging on an influx of new players brought in from the movie and TV series. They're looking to Marvel, as even though Marvel is known for comic books, comics only make up a small percentage of the total income these days, with movies and merchandising bringing home the lion's share.
New players likely only have video games for comparison, so they won't miss the depth of "real D&D". Especially with as advanced as AI is getting, it could simulate a "good enough" experience that will still wow video gamers (although I agree with you that the execution will probably be lacking and underwhelming, just speaking to WOTC's hopes here).
And recurrent spending environments rely on whales more than an army of dedicated consumers. As crappy as it is, Diablo Immortal is bringing in the cash that Blizzard hoped even though basically any RUclips review you see says it's an okay game with horrible over-monetization.
Basically, up until the D&D Beyond boycott, WOTC was betting on the current community only accounting for a drop in the bucket for their overall consumer base, which explains why they seemed to hold the community in such low regard. They weren't concerned with upsetting us, because it's like when a really rad metal band puts out a pop hit. The metalheads all get angry, but the band is way more successful than they were with that fanbase, so they're willing to shed all the old fans in exchange for the army of new ones.
Now that the OGL situation didn't go the way they expected, I'm not sure if this all is still in the current plan, but I think it's pretty obvious this was the way they were going at least. I've personally been over 5e for a couple of years now, so even if they turn a complete new leaf it still probably won't win me back, because I just like the aesthetics that other games provide better, even if 6e is just as open with the licensing.
That's basically been my theory. They wanted to get the new OGL in place so the hordes of new players they were expecting to come in after seeing the movie would have no frame of reference for a true open game environment. And they'd more than make up for the core community that has kept them in business.
Of course, they failed to take into consideration that TTRPGs do not work like a video game you can just pop in and play. Those moviegoers who come out of the movie wanting to play D&D are going to go looking to their family and friends who play. The family and friends Hasbro/WotC gave the middle finger to. So yeah, there might be a significant amount of people walking out of the movie totally hyped to play D&D, but a large chunk of them will be steered to games like Pathfinder 2E, Old School Essentials, and any number of other games simply because their connections have all dumped D&D.
I just want to point out, that since v3.5, WotC has YET to deliver on a fully functional _character builder_ for any edition. 4th was _close_ but still had some horrid bugs and things that just didn't work. They never delivered the rest of that advertised platform either (admittedly, someone died, and that will hurt it, but that goes back to Dave's point on Project Management, why was the project set up with a literal SINGLE POINT of failure?).
Parts of Beyond still don't work. Don't get me started on how I can't put MY FREAKING SADDLE AND SADDLEBAGS ON MY HORSE STILL!
I have no confidence they can deliver on this either.
Regarding the time spent creating 3d environment and the GUI:
It wont affect that many people, those will less in number who wants to create their own campaign there - mostly because it will a huge time investment. I think the official modules will have their main maps in already added into the VTT (for a fee of course), for ease of use for most players. Maybe that would be enough for the playerbase they want anyway. The next that I could envision to be included is a (steam)workshop like thing, where you can get modules and maps - maybe for a fee as well, so official modules would have buyers left. And if I am really adventurous with my thoughts I also can think about having an AI (namely a machine learning model) map builder, that turns text inputs into 3d terrain. Like "A 6 by 6 dungeon room, with a table flipped, and 3 battle ready orcs" could be turned into the needed assets that can be manipulated if needed. But that last thing (and maybe all 3) are outside WotC assumed budget.
All you need is your imagination, dice, paper and pencil.
It's revolutionary!
@@DaveThaumavore I play exclusively in person games. I think WotC is planning on digital only for their next version. How dumb would it be that we all had to log in to this fancy VTT for in home games. Then WotC could finally control what happens at every table. No one is talking about the control aspect. If you don't tow the WotC line, boom, you're banned. Too bad to spent all that money on virtual carrots.
The ability to go anywhere, talk to anyone, and be as ridiculous and crazy as possible... You can't do that in books, movies and TV, or video games. They are trying to make a gate a door. They are similar but still very different.
@@jasonmountain4643 I play exclusively online due to lack of an IRL group, and a wonderful online group that fits my favored play style perfectly.
But unless they manage to pull a miracle out of their butt, I'm not too worried about this impacting me. They've been fumbling the ball continuously lately, so I find that unlikely.
@@Puzzles-Pins Only impact on me is I don't play WotC games anymore. Moved on to better systems back in August. F WotC.
I can guarantee you that they want to get rid of the GM. Their VTT is going to be a platform for them to sell you pre made adventures that can be played like a multiplayer or solo online game. Yeah, they will sell you assets for you to create your own adventure if you want, but that is an afterthought.
Possible - that would fit with the current-gen problem of "not enough DMs", paid DMs, etc. Have actually read comments elsewhere from folks looking forward to that sort of thing. 🤷 I feel that might be solving the wrong problem though - should make it easier for players/interesteds to make the leap to the DM chair, rather than eliminate the need for a DM.
Just the idea of a VTT at all is a non-starter for me. My GMing style is largely based around presenting a sandbox and reacting to player choice to fill it out. When I have to go in and prep that world beforehand, it removes most of the things I enjoy about GMing and replaces them with a bunch of fiddly tedious prep work I don't want to do, and my players lose at least a little bit of their own agency in shaping that world (whether they know it or not).
Not to mention that for me part of the appeal of tabletop gaming is that it's an *escape* from screen time where I can socialize with my friends and be present with them and not looking at my computer or phone for a few hours. The appeal of ttrpg's is that they're *not* video games. If I want to play video games I can do that and I don't need or particularly want D&D for it.
And I think that's the problem with this emphasis on VTT. It codifies one specific GMing style as the "correct" way to run D&D and, while I can only speak for myself and my circle of friends, it's nowhere close to the way most people I know are playing the game.
My take on using VTTs has been to use the pieces that work, and leave the rest. 90% of the game time on my games use either a simple world map, or no display at all, using only the character sheet tools made available. Maps were reserved for "the big fights" if and when they were known in advance. I did eventually make a simple tool for sketching down off-the-cuff maps that basically turned a Foundry scene into a basic dry-erase board. Combine those pieces and I had 99% of my games covered. There's only one thing I did with VTTs that greatly changed how I play online, and that was being able to flesh out shopping. Being able to click a button and roll out a shopkeeper, then have the "shopping episodes" play out with some level of automation not only made it easier for players to make decisions (what was available was *mostly* what was in the shop), but also allowed more exciting RP with the actual shop keepers, as players weren't sitting around waiting while one person spent 10 minutes haggling down a price. Spending an hour making the shops was probably the best use of time I ever had, as players stayed engaged, and actually ended up with more ideas and RP than there would have been otherwise. It's the only piece I really wish could be made more useable for in-person games, as shopping trips were always the slowest part of any campaign I was in.
Spot on breakdown. I hope many eyes see this. I am one of many that want to draw maps with a pen, make monsters on an index card, and move my tokens on a map. I play RPGs to get AWAY from technology.
I play for having fun and, if done right, virtual tabletop is a great tool to have fun.
We'll see if Wizards can do it right.
Doing things right ain't easy.
You know what won't be fun? When you spend four hours (and $40) making a gorgeous, detailed, interactive, and compelling map for your final boss battle… and one of your players can't load it because their computer isn't new enough. Performance isn't just a you must be this tall to ride check. It depends on the assets and numbers in the scene. Game devs spend a ton of time, both theirs and computers, to optimise levels, and an amateur can't do that.
100%
WOTC is banking on the VTT being a success. Since it is the ONLY way they can get recurring revenue from DMs and players. I forsee a basic pack for DMs at the start (a few walls, some kobolds), but everything else will have to be purchased outright or even worse: rented per week/month).
It’s going to suck hard, because Hasbro makes terrible software and they’re eliminating competition. Without outside pressure, I can’t imagine them sticking the landing. That said, it may suck and still not fail.
Yeah, I guess you're right about it sucking and still not failing. The first-party 5e books are objectively horrible and yet they still outsell the best indie and 3rd party RPG books on the market.
@@DaveThaumavore To use another WotC example, Magic Online was atrocious for twenty years and made tons of money. The only reason I think they eventually replaced it with something better was Hearthstone doing so well. As you said, they’re cheap. It kinda makes sense since Hasbro comes from the toy world, which is all about making cheap crap.
Another issue is that plenty of people run multiple rpg systems. I can run anything I want on other VTTs. I have no interest in having a VTT for D&D and a VTT for everything else.
Good one Dave!
But you forgot one key point.
I stopped playing video games when I started spending most of my life staring into one screen or another. Some people need VTTs because they're separated from their friends by great distances, but I think a big part of the charm of the TTRPG is that you play it around a table and not through a computer.
Computers are work. The internet is a hassle. It's great what they can do but playing through a VTT seems to me like playing a game in the company breakroom. Sure, it can be done, but there are better places to do it.
I totally agree. Even 2D VTTs are work. 3D VTTs are far worse.
I play using Discord for video chat because some of favorite gaming friends live in other states. My Alien RPG campaign i am GMing right now has 3 of the 4 players in different states.
I do not use VTT because theater of the mind works nicely. I have my own Discord server and different channels for handouts and other notes and lore. Toss some map handouts, NPC pics, ship schematics, and other info into the proper channels for the scenario and all the players have access to it anytime they want.
Maybe its an unpopular opinion, but I have enjoyed gaming far more now... and have GM'd and played in more games since transitioning to online during the pandemic, than I did before.
And its much less of a hassle than having people over.
Most of my players used to live here and we played in person but they have since moved back to their home states. If you find good players, keep them! 💯💯
@@DaveThaumavore Allowing users to create and share their work on platforms like talestavern cuts down immensely on the work. As the community continues to grow and the database of pre-made content from users gets bigger, it only gets easier and better.
Yes, starting from scratch is a lot of work, but you usually don't have to, at least for Talespire.
SCAG was the red flag that made me question, just at the start of 5e, WotC's professionalism and ethics. Then came some questionable events, like the 45th anniversary dice set, the legal problems with Weiss and Hickman and subpar manuals like Strixhaven, Spelljammer, Tasha, etc. I had already stopped buying their products and into their lies and the VTT and the OGL fiasco have been just the cherry and icing on the cake.
I love D&D, but I have always said that "D&D does not equal 5e or WotC". The sooner people realize this, the better. We should consider WotC as just another 3rd party creator, which now basically is, after their release of SRD under CC license: if it makes something worth our money we may buy, if it doesn't to hell with them.
It's funny to think that they're just another third party creator now. Good job, C-suite.
@@DaveThaumavore I realized this thing only when Michael E. Shea pointed it out on his channel Sly Flourish. And it's perhaps the only decent thing coming out of this ugly story, together with the fact that many players finally opened their eyes. No matter whether WotC releases a wonderful new edition or a pile of crap, the 5e SRD is beyond the guarded walls of CC license and can now be used by any creator. And, if understand correctly how does CC works, maybe it can even be improved by building upon its foundations (e.g. new rules for handling hp and rest), if one so wishes.
As someone that's been in video game development professionally and VTT DMing as a hobby, that list is fairly spot on. Trying to balance the complexity of an accessible experience for new players with the verisimilitude that veterans of TTRPGs expect will be incredibly challenging. Additionally, content is king, and unless there are some **very** robust yet intuitive map creation tools, I expect that games will feel more like playing Solasta or Neverwinter Nights where there's definite limits on player creativity and complexity of environments. What their Store and 3PP user content sharing looks like will be a big factor to their success as well.
I'm having a hard time seeing much of a user-content sharing ecosystem for this, at least in terms of visuals. Anyone with the talent/skill to actually build out a good looking, well-made 3d model of this caliber, would either 1- want to sell it at a much higher price than most TTRPG DMs/players are likely to want to pay, or 2- quickly realize that there are other, better markets for that sort of work (Unity & Unreal stores, Artstation, etc).
That also doesn't figure for the aesthetic aspect. WotC would presumably provide some kind of stock assets for folks to use - PCs, enemies, NPCs, environments, props, etc. Whether they stick to the style shown in their "totally-not 6e" trailer or not, do they expect 3rd party content creators to try to match that style, as opposed to going their own way? Do they expect players/DMs to be savvy enough to look past any aesthetic mismatches - Link in the Elder Scrolls - and if so, what tf is the selling/value proposition of this sort of visual spectacle?
It just seems to me like they don't have a good grasp of who the players are, what they need/want - out of a VTT, or the experience of playing D&D, generally - and how best to achieve that in a manner that's viable & sustainable tech- & business-wise. Rather than getting an updated NwN toolset, I see this as a sh*tshow in slow motion. 🙃
@@mandisaw i was going to say something about this already being tried with NWN 1-2... glad you and MD5473 mention it. I played both of those, and really wanted the online persistent server/world/communities for them to work-out/flourish... but it never really happened. There are simple reasons for how and why it happened the way it did, but it would take too long to go into here, so i'll just say "good points" to you all in these comments.
A lot of the problems you mention are very real... from the perspective of a DM active in the TTRPG community. But from a shareholder's perspective, the community *is the problem that needs to be solved*. We are playing D&D, making stuff for the game to share amongst ourselves, without paying them. We are "undermonitized". They won't need to make the software ux flexible for DMs to use their imagination, if they can get new players and DMs to buy the Phandelver Premium Pack with all the assets you need to play their adventure within their parameters.
At some point, someone at Hasbro learned that D&D was a valuable IP synonymous with the tabletop hobby... and took it to mean they could monetize the hobby itself. I agree that they will fail, but they will still make a lot of short-term money from clueless new players who have yet to realize D&D is not the beginning and end of ttrpgs. The hobby will prevail, but what shape it will be in at the end of this experiment is another question entirely.
Yeah it will be interesting to see how this all plays out. If WotC pivots to a 2D VTT, they could dominate.
@@DaveThaumavore Wouldn't be surprised if that's the push they do to add some extra pressure on rol20 or similar large competitors at some point.
Points well made. Our group has now left dnd for other games which I have been introduced to by your channel. I will wait for when the VTT is released but my friends and I have reasoned that all the pay per skins were inevitable if they the company is desperate to monetise it how they want.
It’s a shame but we trying new stuff which is good for other developers.
Like I will say that tailspire does look nice but much like how you say, 2d vtt is just so much easier to work with. I have to applaud them and dungeon Alchemist for their 3d works.
Dungeon Alchemist can at least make maps quick and easy with the AI feature, don't quite have that functionality with TaleSpire.
Yeah I simply can't be bothered with making maps in tailspire. Its pretty but time consuming.
I can draw a map in 30 seconds in a paint program that gets the job done just fine
@@telarr9164 Dungeon Alchemist is pretty solid for putting together a relatively quick map. Drop some dimensions, have the AI fill it out, then if you don't like the layout you can either tweak it or refresh until it works. Export, and then I can plug it into Fantasy Grounds or Roll20 and call it a day. Alas, all the other 3D VTT's and mapping programs I've backed seem to be a waste of time and money (thankfully not a lot of money on my end).
@@twistedturns65 Thanks! I'll check it out !
@@telarr9164 Slight learning curve (though I think it's pretty easy) and still in development, so check out their RUclips channel before buying and all that.
This is why I make my own top down maps
Yeah sure it takes some time, and I can take care in adding more detail
And, sure, the battle might take the same amount of time that it took to make
But, it’s mine as a DM to share to my PCs, my way, no MTXs
I make my own 3d maps and it is actually easier, though takes lot steeper learning curve and also initial preparation.
But, after that initial time investment, it saves a lot.
I strongly advise you to try learning Blender.
@@goury I’m really keen to!
But my PC needs a major overhaul rn and getting by for the last couple years on Graphics Tablets, old laptop and an IPad Pro
@@thomasace2547 you don't need uber computer to run Blender. It works on toasters and it doesn't need much of anything if you're just learning how to use it.
Start learning now, buy better machine when you're ready and know what you may need for that detailed graphics with complex shaders and other VFX.
VTTs are an aid to the DM and the players to make it easier to run a game. I can see some aspects -- especially those around making it easier for DMs and players to run a game -- can be useful. However, part of the enjoyment of TTRPGs is having the DM narrate and adapt the game to the players, their characters, and the differing choices they make. For example, if a player is playing as a half-orc in Dragon Heist, the DM could make it so that the player knows Yagra and RP some interactions not scripted in the adventure. That's part of what makes TTRPGs fun and interesting to play.
The OGL was created to do exactly what you said for VTT but for adventure modules. WOTC didn't like making adventures because they sold less. The OGL allowed WOTC to write books that sold to players and DMs while the adventure content was farmed out with 3rd parties on the OGL. Their VTT needs open gaming as well, but they are that kid who gets mad they lost and takes the game ball home.
So... we gonna tell them that there's somebody giving out free balls at the corner?
You've absolutely nailed it with this video. I've spent decades working in specialist web and software development companies and seen these 7 things happen time after time - resulting in the failure of projects and even entire businesses.
Using Foundry VTT with maps I've made in Dungeon Alchemist and Virtual Battlemap, I can't help but agree that the hours of time the One~D&D VTT maps would take would be overwhelming. As it is, two of my players had to upgrade their computers just for the 2D maps on Foundry. They would need more upgrades for Unreal 5.
The Foundry mod community is fantastic. Would Hasbro even allow mods?
Great analysis. I remember the same type of software presented when 4e was announced. Did at Hasbro/WotC find the old 4e launch plans and Powerpoint slides, then decide to cast resurrection on them? If I remember correctly, it didn't turn out so great back then either.
Thanks!
Yeah it didn't turn out well due to the whole ::checks notes:: literal murder suicide.
Kind of puts a damper on things.
I have a theory. The reason they're making such a visually demanding VTT is because they also want to launch on game consoles.
Knowing who's I charge I would be very surprised if they want to limit the access of this VTT to just PCs, this would also go along with the idea of it being watered-down compared to other VTTs.
Not a bad idea, but the logic doesn't hold - consoles are actually constrained relative to PCs. Their hardware specs are locked-in years prior to launch, and they basically design backwards - determine the target MSRP (retail price), decide on your % markup and figure a max overhead cost, then come up with hardware that will come in at that budget.
If this VTT were actually being designed for consoles, rather than eye-blisteringly detailed UE5 graphics, which realistically only PS5s could handle (if that), you'd see something more middle-of-the-road, something cool-looking but not as graphically-intensive.
All they really showed was a static-render with ultra-high-res models, very fancy lighting, and a single specific environment - all of which are *way, way* beyond what the actual VTT (if it ever gets made) would ever realistically support if it's meant to be accessible & scalable to potential players/customers. A piece of software that no one can run is just not a viable product.
At this point, it's almost a tradition for even numbered editions of D&D to fail. Your analysis of the situation is spot on and I think your projections will come to pass. Fortunately, this is a rich and diverse hobby that can and will survive without Wizards. They are overdue to lose market share in this space and they have inadvertently triggered something of a renaissance that has already begun to siphon off that market share in a big way.
I didn't think 2E was a failure, was it?
So, when you say "tradition," what you're really saying is a single edition, 4e, was a failure.
Or have I missed something?
@@theophrastusbombastus1359 2E was a bit divisive from what I know. Coincidentally lots of its perceived issues are similar to some other early editions like obtuse, clunky rules. And also that it turned into a landlord game after a while.
Wasn’t nearly as bad as 4e though.
2e most certainly did not fail. It was used for more than 10 years. It had its issues, sure, but it did not fail. Not like the huge steaming mess that was 4e.
I used tabletop simulator for the longest time because it let me have as much or as little 2d and 3d elements as i wanted to use. It felt more real with players hands and everything visible to everyone
Concerning the laborious nature of the DM workload, I imagine the intention will be Module/Adventure Path DLC, paying to have all the environments from something like Curse of Strahd developed for you. The actual fun of DMing, the creativity, will be stomped on by pre-canned adventures
I see this happening to, And I can't wait for players to complain because it will be to "railroady". Because it will only be a set number of maps included in the adventure.
this articulated my concerns with the VTT and the new edition perfectly
I like Table Top Simulator. For $15 you get infinite assets that can be modified infinite ways. Steep learning curve and a bit clunky but few limits. Took me months just to understand what it can do. Look at the Star-Wars assets if you want your mind blown.
Yeah I gave TTS the old college try. I gave up after a couple of weeks of struggling with the interface. But I've definitely seen people does amazing stuff on that platform.
When I saw that they were going all-in on a 3D-only VTT I laughed so hard. It was painfully clear to me that Wizards’ didn’t actually understand their own game or TTRPGs in general.
It is an honor to see our 3d VTT in this video. I'd like to comment that it is possible to create a tavern and then go down to the cellar. I mean we are now implementing "levels". The problem with that is that even if we do add "going down" and not just "going up" into floor levels, it will never be truly practical. VTT's and Worldbuilders in our humble opinion need to help the actual "tt rpg" gameplay. Adding, for instance, the basement of the said Tavern into a new tab rather than another level in the same tab, helps the DM to decide which players see which tab. So overall, at the end of the day, the dungeon master will not like to add that basement or the upper floor in the same scene because VTTs have no use when they try to replicate video games. They will prefer to create different tabs (like in roll20) in case some members of the party never go down and just wait upstairs. We will have the floor system by next month, but we truly believe that people will eventually not really use it. The reason we are doing it though is that many requested it and the way we built our architecture allows us to do it. Thumbs up for the video and many thank yous.
I hope RPG Stories is adopted by millions of players and GMs one day.
On your Software is not their Wheelhouse point, I'd go further. They'll be subject to Gall's Law - "A complex system that works inevitably evolved from a simple system that works; corollary, you cannot get to a complex system that works in one step." I bet, though, that they plan to go this route as they intend to sell extra 3D assets as part of the plan to get to 'correct' monetization levels.
Very nicely laid out. I think it will fail as what most of us think of as a VTT, but it will probably find an audience, especially with younger and less experienced D&D players, as a sort of strange D&D inspired video game. To seasoned players, I don't think it can bring the feeling of TTRPGs and will be ignored. But I hesitate to think it will crash and burn. There are so many of these play to win mobile games that make tons of money by preying on those who are susceptible to the gambling-like tactics used to keep them spending money. As a proper TTRPG tool, I think it's DOA, but it does have a chance to be profitable, just not the way it's currently being marketed.
RPG is not online gaming. Mobile gamers won't have the patience to make 3D adventures. There are also actual 3D RP video games that focus on story but they don't work that well in co-op to be honest(at least from my experience). And you will still need DMs to run said adventures. So even if that new VTT attracts players, it will still struggle to attract DMs. And DMs already have plenty of work with prep etc as is. The need for DMs and their investment to run will be what sinks this VTT more then all the other issues. All the bad schemes that still made money, pretty much run themselves and depend on psychological tactics to keep people invested. Without DMs, there are no games to be invested in, no matter what tricks you try to use.
@@Mithguar I totally agree that without DMs, it won't be used the way most RPG players expect to play. But I heard rumor that they are planning on using automated DMs for basic adventures. That sounds boring to me, it will probably be a bland railroad. But that doesn't mean people won't consume it. It will just be a different audience, and we're not part of it. It's a no go for me, but I've seen too many "garbage" apps do well just because of the marketing to naive players.
Honestly, I think their VTT is going to be basically WotC's Mansions of Madness.
At best, DM's will have little to no assets to work with unless they are willing to just run official adventures.
For all we know WotC's plan is to jack up the price of books while keeping much of the game exclusive to the VTT.
I don't think they're leaving the TTRPG scene just yet (even though they should, based on what they want), but I doubt they have much future in the space.
You nailed it. WOTC has killed their TTRPG revenue stream. The VTT will not deliver. They will be left with true video games and media in movie and streaming/TV form, plus a few toys. That may be enough to compensate for the RPG losses, but who knows? 🙏🎲
I think they would have a better chance if they bought Talespire like they bought DnDBeyond, but I'm glad they didn't because Talespire is actually good and it has more options like running a cyberpunk game or other fantasy system. Not to mention it takes FOREVER to make a map for what could be a 10 minute encounter.
Great video! I think you’re right, and I kind of hope so too. I really don’t believe that micro transactions have a place in TTRPGs even if they’re played on a VTT, it just stinks of corporate greed to me.
This sounds 100% accurate to me. Great job putting all this together.
Thank you!
This sounds like you can't have a critical though.
That's sad.
I agree with all your points. It seems that the trust between WotC and the biggest spending section of the D&D/TTRPG world (DMs) has been shaken quite alot with the OGL-debacle. There's now a bunch of 5e forks and/or other fantasy RPGs that are gunning for the title of "D&D" (and I'm not too much into OSR, which probably has a ton of contenders as well). During 4th it was Pathfinder. Currently, I'm just waiting on who becomes "D&D".
I’m not sure any other game company has the ability to market the way WotC has, nor does the hobby really need a monolithic game to follow.
@@DaveThaumavore Oh certainly on both. I'm hoping people will diversify even beyond fantasy into all sorts of weird and cool RPG stuff, though I don't necessarily see most casual audiences move away from a single game to default to.
5e was actually called D&D Next before release.
Of course! I made a mistake there. An errata has been added to the pinned comment. Thanks for catching that.
There’s already working DnD VTT and it’s has been running over 20 years. Neverwinter Nights.
I've been calling them Wizards On The Cheap ever since their entire marketing campaign for Avernus was to get live play troupes around the world to play out scenarios and paid them in schwaggg. I'm surprised they didnt run a contest first, coulda saved on the schwagg:).
Agreed. This is the main problem I have with VTT's. My group has been looking into TaleSpire as a way to run our game.... but I am not really interested in it. The way I want to make my games is that I want to design everything. That way I know what every cupboard includes. I know where every potion is. I know where every sword and coin purse is. What TaleSpire forces me to do is to not only make all of that, but also make it in 3D with assets that exist within TaleSpire. It just isn't a workload I can handle without burning myself out. I have a day job after all.
I do not think I will be using OneD&D and its VTT. I just want a easy to use VTT where I have access to what I want that can control what the players see and not see. If my workload become to much or that I am forced to pay loads of money, I simply can not continue playing the game.
Sixty-six ghouls crewing a ship in A Module and a demon figurehead - yep, take my money for those, and the fancy multi-storey temple preceding it.
Interesting. You showed video of Neverwinter Nights, but associated said video with Sword Coast Legends.
Neverwinter Nights Extended Edition is the only Virtual Table Top you need. That game, literally, has decades of fan generated custom content, it is 2.5 D, runs on your phone, has a powerful dungeon master client and is widely available.
Thanks for the info
I backed TaleSpire. It's a wonderful software, very fun to play around with.
Did I ever ran a game with it? Nope.
TTRPG are and will always be, to me, a social game that requires pen, dice, minis (or not), chips and human beings to be sitting next to each other and sharing a moment.
I already have tons of video games for what they envision and it already works great, thanks.
I hope they get more visibility. I'm aware of TaleSpire (and feature it in this video) but I never see anyone using it or talking about it.
I use Talespire all of the time it's a fantastic VTT even at its early access stage. It will be joining us when we are back in the same space.
Just a different style of play. The user created boards and slabs reduce prep time immensely. I agree that WotC will fail here. VTTs arent going anywhere though.
One thing not mentioned, much of DND is improvising. Setting up a 2D tabletop is far more simple than 3D and in that you need only to download images to put in and online it can take a minute of downtime to find a character portrait or location. In 3D adapting and improvising is far more difficult as not only is it more time consuming but getting 3D objects will all be in house and will have to comply with whatever standards WOTC sets up.
I have an international group so we use a VTT. Your point about player hardware is insurmountable and is the main reason this whole idea is DOA. We started using Tabletop Simulator, but none of us had a PC with anywhere near enough grunt to actualy run that VTT without melting. We now use Roll20. If WotC think most players even have the kit to access there walled garden they're delusional.
Don't worry about map prep time for the new VTT is likely you won't be able to make custom maps anyway you'll only be able to use the maps they make or you'll have to buy maps from third-party creators that are going to be forced into some kind of agreement that gives WotC 50+ percent of the cost meaning you'll be paying probably $20 plus per map so the creator that spent extensive amount of hours making a decent map can get a little bit of value from that time spent
Just sounds so awful.
Hasbro/WotC being cheap with their productions has one major reason: Their upper level management is completely overpaid. There was an investigation by one of the shareholders which found out that they pay themselves higher wages than even Apple management. Imagine the hubris of paying yourself a wage greater than what a tech industry giant gets when you're a (failing) toy company.
I guess that an option to save this project is to offer a complete product not open to changes or many options and DM-less, this is my idea: Take the board games advance system and turn them into a virtual experience. I love those game, had them all but due to covid I was force to sell them, I will not mind to buy them again in a virtual room, I mean the idea looks super cool and can be expanded, let say we got Wrath of Ashardalon with all the minis looking increaible in color and with a nice inferface with voice over, and animation between chapters, etc. Yet it will only be that if you want to play another adventure, then we buy Castle Ravenloft or Temple of evil, etc.
You forgot to mention that the VTT will require both DMs & players to pay for a subscriptions and that the lower tiers of the subscription model STILL does not allow for Home brewing or a live DM. Instead all players will have to suffer an AI DM, and railroaded adventures.
All other points are spot on. D&D 6E is DOA in my opinion, and it will absolutely lose its market share for the brand. I’m not sure which game system will over take it, probably not one out yet.
The one thing your analysis leaves out is speculation about the role AI might play in WOTC's plans.
My suspicion is that they're probably developing some sort of AI sandboxing tool that will initially assist the DM in creating environments, and then replace the DMs entirely.
I also think they're thinking about D&D as an elaborate "choose your own adventure" flowchart. In other words, they're fundamentally misunderstanding how tabletop roleplaying games actually work. In their perception, all they've got to do is built an elaborate sandbox filled with every option gameplay might demand. They think D&D is a video game.
Maybe AI will ramp up sufficiently in the next year to be viable as a DM. But also remember that the Hasbro and WOTC brass don't actually regard current D&D players as the bulk of their target market. They want low level video gamers as their market. People who will accept point and click sandpit gaming.
I agree that they fundamentally don't understand TTRPGs. Certainly there are some people at the company who do. Most of them, probably. But people like Cynthia Williams and Chris Cao appear to be completely ignorant of the nature of the game style.
Insightful and relevant commentary. Thanks for your efforts in putting this together. This articulates all the stumbling blocks I have been mulling over re: DMing in a virtual space.
Glad it was helpful!
Tried to set up a 5e game on Roll20 for some old friends. Good support for the interactive character sheet but the system itself (while fine) still had a foreign object vibe. Went forward with prep for a 1e game instead. Decent character sheet, adding custom macros was straightforward enough, and there is one active+enthusiastic developer for it, but playing on a VTT felt out of place with respect to the vintage rules. Decided to just use Discord for teleconference and roll real dice on our individual tables. Will draw the map on a shared whiteboard and that’s it.
The issue with GM prep is real for a lot of VTT's. Like.... it's cool and all having a fancy 3d map. If you have some big battle about to happen that's great. Except when you put in all that time and your players completely go to a different area you haven't prepped.
Sometimes simple and theater of the mind is just more feasible.
I had the exact same thoughts when I saw the promo footage. "This wil be so cumbersome on the GM's end that you'd have to buy every asset just to save time," not to mention the hardware requirements of something that looks so gorgeous. It's going to be a fun month watching what happens when this drops.
When they were asked at the creator’s summit in early April if the VTT could be run on slower computers, they responded “Is that something you want?” They are completely clueless.
Biggest reason is "theatre of the mind".
The more you try and replace people's imagination with 3d objects, the more it would suck in comparison.
I would like to point out the whole rent vs. own situation. "Buying" books on D&DBeyond or VTT assests is all rented. Once the platform is toast, so are your purchases. I have seen many official digital products over the years. It never takes long for them to stop support or updates. Then, once again, your investment is toast. Anyone else remember the digital "Core Rules" or the "Forgotten Realms Interactive Maps"?
I think point two is actually an important part of the business model. If we're playing tabletop, I can make up a vampire game without buying the Strahd book if I don't want to shell out the money and the reviews are bad. It's literally as easy as sitting down and jotting down some notes , and maybe playing the game with dim lights and candles at the table, wearing a Van Helsing costume. However, if I'm playing in a VTT, it becomes much harder for me to put together and maps and assets and monsters, so I have an even greater incentive to cave and pay Wizards obscene amounts of money for some half-baked maps that I didn't have to make myself. I think it's a great way for Wizards to funnel people into buying their products, even those of us who avoid their products because we don't think they deliver quality. Just make the game so hard that people pay for convenience.
I've been skeptical of VTTs since the first ones came out, and I've never DMed with one. I've played in one twice, and it added nothing to my experience. If anything, it distracted some of my fellow players. I don't play with minis, either; I have some army men and chess pieces I scavenged from some yard sale crawls that work just fine if we need to map out positioning on the table for some reason. The game happens in my head, and I find anything physical to be either limiting what I can imagine (what do I do when my lovingly painted dwarf miniature that carries a hammer finds the Axe of the Dwarven Lords? Buy and paint a new mini?) or unnecessarily expensive and time consuming. Theatre of the mind ftw.
Bro you had me at "prepare for Hot Garbage". LMAO 🤣
Trading imagination for visual immersion is a tight rope. The balance of tabletop vs video game is tricky. Hasbro & WotC have not been through the growing pains or earned the wisdom gained from the main VTT platforms. It will take a miracle to make this right. I believe that Hasbro needs to return the game back to the community and go back to doing what they are experienced at; the making and distribution of physical toys. The initial announcement and the playtest already implied disaster and major concerns for the community. I had a feeling that someone tried to make the case for an internal VTT platform based on Covid-19 era data, too little too late. Fire THAT person.
The surge of online D&D during the pandemic may have made a lot of people think online is a great way to play .. & it is!
The convenience of not leaving your house is very tempting & we have got a bit lazy I think.
Once you start playing in-person again you will realise how much better it is. Putting miniatures on the table, making scenery out of foam, giving physical handouts of letters on tea stained paper, standing up & pacing the room in dilemma.
Virtual is a good tool & substitute, but its not REAL D&D. Just as facetime is not the same as going to the pub with your mates.
Full agreement on all points. A few more notes:
First of all a couple of to-be-fair caveats re 2 and 3:
While it's obviously much easier to create your own sufficiently fancy maps with 2D tools than with 3D ones, most just either draw simple grid dungeons or use pretty maps provided by others, which are roughly equal GM effort for both 2D and 3D. Of course, ready-made 3D maps ought to cost considerably more, given the increased effort for those that ultimately have to create them.
The VTT for D&D4e probably would've been underwhelming, anyway, based on all the other - far less ambitious - digital tools getting canned as well, but it got canceled for... different reasons.
And while they let MTG Online languish with severely outdated graphics and UI, MTG Arena looks quite good and plays about as quickly as possible. Doesn't erase its plethora of issues, though.
As for Sword Coast Legends, I remember a dev team that wanted to do more, limited by budget constraints and market assumptions of executives imposing a cheap, dumbed down experience.
Re 4: The hardest facepalm, of course, is that they just canceled most of their recently started fully fledged D&D video game projects, presumably so they wouldn't compete with their D&D VTT.
Re 7: Having read the "OGL" 1.1, I frankly find it hard to believe they even wanted 3PP in their VTT, to begin with. Just more greedy foolishness on their part. I guess they forgot about TF2 skins.
8: This VTT is going to cost people alot of money. Something that 41 years of playing RPG's has taught me...gamers are broke. One of the reasons RPG's are so popular among people with little discretionary money is that they can have unlimited fun with a single book (or pirated PDF if they don't have 2 dimes to rub together). If these people don't have the money, they will not pay obscene amounts of money no matter how good the VTT is.
Yeah I totally agree.
those people are not the target audience, they target normies with money that got into dnd with stranger things and critical role since being nerd is hip today, they are purposedly alienating their long time customers
I bought Icewind dale on roll20. It was already pre-installed and the quality was good. It saved 80% of the work as a GM to do something of that size. Even though roll20 has a good DnD character sheet you still have to manually enter most non basic power for your character. This is both good and bad meaning it's more work but also means you can do whatever. If they do not let a very high amount of customization be possible due to micro transaction (think dnd beyond) I don't think it will do well.
Not just a Xbox Exec, she also was a Phillip Morris Finance Executive, she didn't leave a company that was trying to sell children Cigarettes.
Oh wow, you’re right. I didn’t know that. She’s a complete sociopath. That really makes a lot of sense now.
The only way I see their VTT working is if it had some kind of user friendly asset generator ala Spore or Mario Maker, with a corresponding market place where creators could share what they've made with other subscribers. You'd get a ton of terrible stuff, but if it had useful key words and a good rating system I imagine there would be plenty of people (not just DMs) generating assets that anyone could use. WotC could charge their subscription fee and maybe sell optional professionally made maps and characters along side official books. There could even be theme packs that give users more stuff to play with when they make things beyond the basic free tools, as long as you don't have to buy the theme packs to use content created with them. I don't think Wizards is capable of making such a thing well, but if they could this would make them a lot of money.
Not sure if the concern about hardware limitations is a thing. Modern games for PC almost always have options to control the level of detail to accommodate weaker computer systems. That being said, the boycotting of WotC will greatly impact sales and subscriptions even if the VTTRPG software is perfect in every way.
You've hit all the Kobolds on the head with this video.
The fact that it’s 3D shows how out of touch they are. Not only is it unimmersive for most people as it feels like a board game, but it will be impossible to run for most people.
2D with some fun animations like fireballs flying over the map is all they had to do.
I enjoy 2d vtts because I lack thr skill for irl 3d terrain but am able to make very nice maps in foundry.
But sometimes I also enjoy just a table with nothing but some sounds playing in the background.
I share your opinion on 3d vtts. To much work for little reward.
I have trouble with making maps in foundry. Did you just persist until you had a breakthrough or is there an addon that makes it easier?
@@rorysimpson8716 I had to learn how to scale tthem so you can use the grid, i also like to use the DF Architect series of modules to make things easier. I don't "draw" the maps in fvtt, i only wall them there, for map creation i use Dungeondraft or maps from patreons I support.
@@rorysimpson8716 You can try rpgmap, it lets you export the maps you create with a specific pixel per square ratio. Just put them in Foundry and change the Foundry scene pixep per square ratio to the same you exported the map. Fits like a glove
Remember... one of their own investors came out on Twitter and called them "leaderless." They are going to fail on this hard and I am looking forward to that schadenfreude.
WOTC doesn't care if DMs can create in the vtt because they want to force dms to buy their pre made modules. To them its a feature, not a bug.
That may be the case. If so, it's completely doomed.
Crimson Dragon Slayer D20 is a FREE pdf and non-OGL. It's fantasy roleplaying in arcade mode!
Great analysis, Dave, and lyrical. "Recipe for desolation" is
Solid video. Another thing I'd thought of is its a bit late as far as VTTs go. Most people who are going to use a VTT are already using one and probably have been for years. I personally have been using tabletop simulator for like 8-9 years now and have 900+ hours of running for my friends who don't live near me. I've got literally no reason to go to a paid service that provides me with a (likely) inferior product.
Also feels bad putting the good PS2 Dark Alliance box art over the trashy gameplay of the game that released a few years ago haha.
I think if WotC pivoted to a 2D VTT, they might be able to covert a lot of people over. But they're so greedy that maybe it would still be a miserable experience.
I'm a pen and paper GM/player. Nothing will ever replace physical play in my mind. Yes, it's a shame for people who can't play live, and I love that technology has allowed people to play remotely. I'm glad that people can play TTRPGs even if they can't meet in person, but in-person play is the ideal.
I wanted to be optimistic, but… you’re right. With their track record, why would this product be any different than the several failed projects they’ve tried to do in the past
A company can always turn a corner. But not with this current leadership and in light of what has transpired in the past couple of months.
2D is also doable in a 3D environment - it's just a layer using a flat plane. I think they do need to make sure that is good enough for filling the cracks for all the pieces still in development.
A problem not touched on regarding 3D assets - if they allow anyone to put assets up for sale through OneDnD, you're most likely going to see lots of 3D assets available for purchase, and most of them will be stolen assets. How will WotC deal with that when the lawyers come calling? That attempt at a new OGL didn't look like it left much wiggle room for them to claim they didn't know the asset was stolen, given how much they were banging on about policing the DnD space for bad actors...
2:08 Hardware (or internet) Requirements
3:40 Hard on GMs trying to prep
5:05 Software isn't their wheelhouse
7:06 It would be like a laborious money-draining video game
8:30 They won't get the complexity right
10:16 Wizards of the Coast is cheap
11:12 WotC is not to be trusted
Even if they were to overcome all of these challenges, I don’t see the end product being more fun than a MMORPG. There plan seems to have almost all of the shortcomings of MMORPGs, with few of the advantages, while removing all the comparative advantages found in TTRPGs, such as extreme, instant flexibility.
Good way of putting it.