Hasbro is investing hugely on D&D, with a new Vice President. But the type of D&D they're hiring and investing for is not tabletop...
#dnd #ttrpg #osr
Remarkably, this is so close to the take I've had since the moment they announced the One branding that I'm honestly shaken because I rarely tend to agree with very much of what the pundit has to say.
They're shooting to reproduce the gargantuan success they've had with MtG Arena, folks don't tend to pay attention to it since the gaming space is not very apt to pay attention to video games as many of us view them as being something altogether different but... the fact is, it's really not that different, especially since the BIG BOIs realized just how much money Apps can and DO make. The kind of cash they made in terms of raw profit from MtG Arena all by itself absolutely DWARFS the profit margins of literally every other product and IP they hold, and let me stress this, even when you sum 100% of the those profits from EVERY product line, it isn't even CLOSE. The sole exception to this whole "most exclusively profitable" thing is the money WotC rakes in from offering their trademarks to merch companies to sell shirts, stickers, candy, hats, and a million other things that they invest $0.00 of their own money to make while generating a lucrative percentage of sales.
Five years from now there are going to be 2-5x as many people actually playing "tabletop RPGs" via a smartphone or computer application than have cumulatively EVER played ANY and EVERY RPG that has ever been published in dead tree form. The writing is and has been on the wall, you can struggle against the tide but it will only ever pull you under if so, best to adapt and find a way to make a living off the new revenue streams. I will always personally prefer playing IN PERSON with friends but the reality is that this kind of game is going to be something like 1 in a thousand once the big virtual RPG market really takes hold, and it WILL take hold.
I already decided I'm not making ttrpgs, and this only cements my decision further.
They are going to invest in Digital, because they believe there will be more money in digital; and because it will also be easier to control the gaming content. I will use the term Analog here, to refer to the original gaming experience; because music transitioned from Analog to Digital, and digital largely sucked. Sure, there has been some neat digital music; but the old classic songs that have far outlived their creators, were created in analog. Go listen to music from the 1960s and 1970s on vinyl. It's a more sonically pleasing experience.
All Along the Watchtower
Whole Lotta Love
Hotel California
House of the Rising Sun
Etc.
I think this is a good thing for people that don't play 5e (and One D&D when it drops).
As One DnD morphs into a Fantasy X-Com... and becomes more self-involved with the digital space, it will pull its new fans into that realm, a WHOLE lot of people will eventually move on to other things (not TTRPG related). OR they will start looking at other TTRPGs that are new to them.
The fact of the matter is, for the vast majority of Non-WotC TTRPG's out there, the audience of games comes from GM's that poach D&D players from their tent and show them The Way. That is why all other TTRPG's will follow the line of infinite regression behind D&D... but One D&D is different. I suspect it's business model will make the D&D brand into something so significantly different there will be a big shuffling off of players that find it too restrictive or boardgamey.
This should have two effect: a slight dip in gamers overall, once the initial wave hits after One D&D drops. Then for us long-haul GM's and designers, if we play our cards right, we should be seeing a new blooming of space where gamers that don't leave the hobby completely, will actively look for other gaming experiences outside of D&D. This is an opportunity - not a bad thing. I'm not an OSR guy - but I can imagine the OSR could greatly benefit from this as long as they continue to do outreach.
If you play 5e. I can't help you. Enjoy 5e.
For non-D&D games going strong now? They should get stronger, to pick up that slack. At least that's what I'm hoping.
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on October 11, 2022, 06:34:36 PM
Remarkably, this is so close to the take I've had since the moment they announced the One branding that I'm honestly shaken because I rarely tend to agree with very much of what the pundit has to say.
They're shooting to reproduce the gargantuan success they've had with MtG Arena, folks don't tend to pay attention to it since the gaming space is not very apt to pay attention to video games as many of us view them as being something altogether different but... the fact is, it's really not that different, especially since the BIG BOIs realized just how much money Apps can and DO make. The kind of cash they made in terms of raw profit from MtG Arena all by itself absolutely DWARFS the profit margins of literally every other product and IP they hold, and let me stress this, even when you sum 100% of the those profits from EVERY product line, it isn't even CLOSE. The sole exception to this whole "most exclusively profitable" thing is the money WotC rakes in from offering their trademarks to merch companies to sell shirts, stickers, candy, hats, and a million other things that they invest $0.00 of their own money to make while generating a lucrative percentage of sales.
Five years from now there are going to be 2-5x as many people actually playing "tabletop RPGs" via a smartphone or computer application than have cumulatively EVER played ANY and EVERY RPG that has ever been published in dead tree form. The writing is and has been on the wall, you can struggle against the tide but it will only ever pull you under if so, best to adapt and find a way to make a living off the new revenue streams. I will always personally prefer playing IN PERSON with friends but the reality is that this kind of game is going to be something like 1 in a thousand once the big virtual RPG market really takes hold, and it WILL take hold.
I remember when people were saying that MMORPGs would replace TTRPGs. :D
Really, people can play online all they like. For some, it's the only way they can play, and more power to them. I appreciate better tools and applications to that end.
But for myself, and apparently for you too, the experience is not the same.
It doesn't help that every attempt to date to create a digital table top is a graveyard of unfulfilled promises.
The thing they want, IMHO it now becomes clear, is physically written in the Title: One DnD
Not many, One:
One unified, seamless experience, the same exact system, across physical and virtual platforms.
No work-arounds, no custom home-brew, no house rules, and so on.
& to this end:
the rules are now being re-jigged.
Not to any specific play-requirements, not because "it's about time" (although there's some of that), not because these changes are what Reddit wants, or streamers want. Not because 5e stopped working.
Hence all the streamlining of mechanics, simplification, shared spell lists.
To fit in with a VTT.
And that means, the things in the game that can't be done on a digital platform, are going to have to go.
The first thing that comes to mind is illusion spells ... you can't create a 3D illusion of something in a VTT, unless that thing is already a game asset, ie .the 3d model of it is already sitting on your PC.....
Enjoyed the video.
I'm still not seeing it yet. I'll get to that in a second.
With respect to their new SVP, Microsoft executives are in high demand. They have a reputation for being able to work and build fast. Microsoft Dynamics 365 carries a huge variety of business tools to link company resources and provide various insights and inputs.
Good candidates are often notoriously difficult to hire away from Microsoft due to their willingness to immediately counteroffer/match talent they want to retain. In my experience you typically get one of three buckets 1) talent you overpay for... 2) talent Microsoft was willing to lose... or 3) talent that wants to escape the Microsoft culture—it is exhausting. By far, I see more of the first and third buckets as they are pretty good at smothering out untalented individuals. The occasional one does make it through the net.
Harvard and Marine is not a common combination. Living and working in multiple countries is also a good sign that identity politics and the such might be filed away accordingly. Naturally, only time will tell and there is not a lot of benefit in speculating.
Playing at the table with his kids is positive sign. A lot of gaming experiences have faded from memory—only natural as I have had many of them. But the ones that include introducing and playing the game with my kids and family have not. Helping my son prep for his D&D club game as DM has not. Anyone who has experienced these things knows it cannot be substituted in a VTT.
Back to what I'm not seeing...as the naming convention suggests, virtual table top and table top are different experiences, and one does not need to sacrifice one to have the other. From the quotes referenced in the video, nothing has mentioned fading out of the table top market. Everything referenced talks about growing the two along next to one another. Any executive who cares about their future and the future of the company would want to maximize all distribution channels. You only cannibalize one channel if by not doing so you sacrifice multiple.
Right after I post this, I'm going to ask that cat above me to show me the receipts on "No work-around, no custom home-brew, no house rules, and so on". So far, this has been nothing but conjecture without evidence. And while calling something "One" is associated with one true way-isms, and worse, it has become so prevalent that it can also simply mean an evergreen product.
Quote from: meireish on October 12, 2022, 07:38:47 AM
No work-arounds, no custom home-brew, no house rules, and so on.
Any direct evidence of this?
Two reasons I cannot take this on faith alone:
Chris Perkins is the primary designer behind the DMG for OneD&D. He has decades of experience expanding the base game. There are some really good interviews where he talks about how annoying he was with all of his Dragon submissions decades ago. Next, look at the ridiculous spectacle of the PAX game he led, which persisted across multiple versions of the game for nearly a decade. Homebrew everywhere. The Acquisitions Incorporated supplement is a near insane departure from the base 5e game. I would also encourage people to read some of Chris' DM advice. After spending a lifetime in this hobby expanding the game, I am supposed to believe he is going to consolidate.
D&D Beyond has spent years EXPANDING tools and homebrew capabilities. Since making their big purchase, WotC has only continued to expand. To remove functionality would be a complete change in direction. To date, you will not find a single word or press release saying they are looking to change direction of that product. You will only find mention of expansion.
Happy to be proven wrong if you have better sources than I do!
" I'm going to ask that cat above me to show me the receipts on "No work-around, no custom home-brew, no house rules, and so on".
No receipts no,
But because with a fully digital VTT, ie more like a 3d or isometric mmo, rather than just "skype +map-sharing",
if you want some homebrew, the system will have to
a. allow mods
b. you'll have to code it.
EDIT: I'd just like to stress, that I meant "no homebrew mechanics", not "no-one gets to write/use/publish adventures", adventures will definitely be allowed
I expect to see is some attempt at OneDND integrated with the Adventurer's League and an effort to push players into AL-style gaming with strangers. That might be okay for a few sessions but in my experience this is an unsatisfying level of play.
If they're smart & devious then you might end up being able to take content entered by creative DMs and repackaging it as DLC. Although this has the danger of veering into 3.X and 4-style unmanageable bloat.
Fundamentally I don't think there is a clear winning strategy for OneDND. All of the major strategies have already been tried by other VTTs. And there's enough groups out there now using other VTTs, all with their own features. Switching to use WOTCs product and toolset has a real cost if you've built a campaign in Roll20 or similar. I do think it's plausible if WOTC tries to screw these VTTs, then you might see a 4E/Pathfinder situation again.
I don't think there's much of a future for any ttrpgs owned by non-ttrpg companies. They're definitely going to whore out their IPs for mobile gaming and so on. And if that doesn't work then they'll just let those IPs die. We've seen this with examples like Rackham being bought out by Cyanide: their IPs got two attempts at video games before being abandoned completely.
They are creating something new. Not a tabletop RPG but not an MMO. This might be ideal for isolated gamers. It might be like popping into an MMO but there is a human brain behind much of it so its not just fighting. It may be an even better for bringing in newbies than current models. It will probably live alongside tabletop RPG as the experience will be so different.
It may be really great for whichever games fill the vacuum that is likely to develop in the table-top space when the Coastal Wizards concentrate on digital.
The issue is that One D&D will define for players what "RPG's" are. And due to the experience it will deliver via the VTT medium, will *become* what ongoing players will claim is D&D (and to them - RPG's writ-large because it will likely be all they know). But for all other TTRPG's that aren't engaged in that medium - they will be "something else".
To those of us that do not play D&D/use VTT's - they are the ones mutating into something else. And it will be a different experience. I'm not against it at all. I actually encourage it. I see this as D&D becoming its own hobby entirely. Like playing Total War on your PC isn't the same thing as playing WHFRP.
And that's okay (at least this is how I see it). Your favorite brand of D&D is only dead if you stop playing it. Whatever it becomes was not intended for you if you don't want it.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 10:48:37 AM
The issue is that One D&D will define for players what "RPG's" are. And due to the experience it will deliver via the VTT medium, will *become* what ongoing players will claim is D&D (and to them - RPG's writ-large because it will likely be all they know). But for all other TTRPG's that aren't engaged in that medium - they will be "something else".
Well, we already lived through that once -- which is where the "TT" in "TTRPG" came from in the first place. Like you, I don't mind other types of RPGs existing, but it's a little annoying that the OG of RPG types has to include a qualifier in common parlance.
My concern doesn't lie with 1D&D, it what will come after it; will 6E or 2D&D just be a straight up video game that greatly limits player and DM options? Will the program do all your dice rolls and math for you? Will there even be a need for an actual DM to be present, or will there just be community made and official WOTC made prepackaged adventures? Will it be riddled with loot boxes and micro transactions (okay, I'm it not psychic but I already know the answer to this one: YES). Will this destroy third party content and creators?
Maybe the sky is falling, maybe I just got hit on the head with an acorn. I guess only time will tell.
I see the homebrew/original content issue as being what will probably make or break the OneD&D VTT. You have to remember that at the end of the day, the people who most determine what games get played are DMs. DMs do most of the reading of RPG books, they do most of the finding of new games to play, and they're the only player that is necessary for a game to go forward. A lot of DMs are already less than satisfied with the limitations that VTT playing places on their imaginations and creativity, and the OneD&D VTT seems like it will end up being even more restrictive.
Hasbro has been pretty successful so far encouraging the 5e generation to lean on pre-written modules, but not being able to homebrew takes away a lot of the appeal of DMing, and if DMs don't want to run games on the new system, that's going to hurt the platform considerably.
If they're going to do away with the DM's ability to homebrew, they'll probably need to do away with the need for DMs entirely. That is theoretically possible, but then you really are looking at something more akin to a videogame than to a TRPG. The problem I see them running into there is that if they dispose of the elements that make RPGs distinct from videogames, they're entering a market in which they can't compete. I don't see WOTC successfully making a rival to something like Final Fantasy 14 or Fortnite. You could argue that they've already tried and failed, back when Dungeons & Dragons online died along with all the other also-rans of the WoW-era MMO boom.
I also think it's worth pointing out that while online play has largely taken over the RPG space, VTT gaming hasn't necessarily done so. If you look around at the popular "actual play" series online, a lot of them are using voice chat and possibly an online dice roller, but are not using the full virtual tabletop. The impression I get is that is also the case in much of the wider online play world. Even the people who have embraced online play haven't all embraced the virtual minis aspect of it.
Quote from: Tasty_Wind on October 12, 2022, 11:10:14 AM
My concern doesn't lie with 1D&D, it what will come after it; will 6E or 2D&D just be a straight up video game that greatly limits player and DM options? Will the program do all your dice rolls and math for you? Will there even be a need for an actual DM to be present, or will there just be community made and official WOTC made prepackaged adventures? Will it be riddled with loot boxes and micro transactions (okay, I'm it not psychic but I already know the answer to this one: YES). Will this destroy third party content and creators?
Maybe the sky is falling, maybe I just got hit on the head with an acorn. I guess only time will tell.
So... you sound like a good person to ask this: Does it matter? Do you suffer from FOMO if you're not playing the latest edition of D&D? This scenario you posit above is curious to me...
Let's pretend they go FULL Tactical Video Game mode. So what? Do you feel forced to play that to enjoy D&D? Are there not other editions and means of enjoying D&D. Even games that are not specifically D&D but are in everything but name (OSR). Not to mention the bazillions of other TTRPGS out there?
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 11:14:12 AM
I see the homebrew/original content issue as being what will probably make or break the OneD&D VTT. You have to remember that at the end of the day, the people who most determine what games get played are DMs. DMs do most of the reading of RPG books, they do most of the finding of new games to play, and they're the only player that is necessary for a game to go forward. A lot of DMs are already less than satisfied with the limitations that VTT playing places on their imaginations and creativity, and the OneD&D VTT seems like it will end up being even more restrictive.
That's right. They're trying to be like Apple and create a "D&D Ecosystem" where DM's will invest in all their virtual tchotchkes, and be reluctant to stray out of that ecosystem. And I'm going to put a spin on the "lot of DM's not being satisfied with VTT's". I think WotC doesn't *care* about those DM's... and you prove my point below...
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 11:14:12 AMHasbro has been pretty successful so far encouraging the 5e generation to lean on pre-written modules, but not being able to homebrew takes away a lot of the appeal of DMing, and if DMs don't want to run games on the new system, that's going to hurt the platform considerably.
Welcome to my world. MOST DM's do not homebrew. Most DM's in 5e run only modules. If a DM leaves OneD&D's new ecosystem, if they play their cards right, this new version of D&D will groom players to engage in what is going to be basically a big X-Com game that requires very little if any actual DMing experience. I think they believe they'll capture players and groom them into believing *this* is what RPG's are about.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 11:14:12 AMIf they're going to do away with the DM's ability to homebrew, they'll probably need to do away with the need for DMs entirely. That is theoretically possible, but then you really are looking at something more akin to a videogame than to a TRPG. The problem I see them running into there is that if they dispose of the elements that make RPGs distinct from videogames, they're entering a market in which they can't compete. I don't see WOTC successfully making a rival to something like Final Fantasy 14 or Fortnite. You could argue that they've already tried and failed, back when Dungeons & Dragons online died along with all the other also-rans of the WoW-era MMO boom.
... and there you go. No DM's. Or at least nothing *I* would consider a DM. They might have a player make some executive decisions like setting up parameters (assuming this system is well designed, which I don't believe it will be, who knows?). This is precisely why I think those DM's that *want* that TTRPG experience will move on to other actual TTRPG's, or they will drop out of the hobby altogether (which is normal for people not getting their itch scratched). But I suspect it will be a net-gain for non-D&D games.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 11:14:12 AMI also think it's worth pointing out that while online play has largely taken over the RPG space, VTT gaming hasn't necessarily done so. If you look around at the popular "actual play" series online, a lot of them are using voice chat and possibly an online dice roller, but are not using the full virtual tabletop. The impression I get is that is also the case in much of the wider online play world. Even the people who have embraced online play haven't all embraced the virtual minis aspect of it.
It's a risky move for sure.
Yeah, and freeform chats are the most common form of online RP. It's easier to get into RPing if you don't need to read huge rulebooks. It's also not something that you can monetize.
Also, there are now AI DMs that can dynamically describe games on the fly with minimal immersion breaks. You don't need a real DM anymore.
They'll have options. They'll have dials. They'll have things you can set or not set.
The users will still be limited to whatever those options are. It's not quite the Model T, where Ford famously said that you can have any color you want as long as it is black. Now think about the options you have on a particular make and model of a car now. Or heck, don't limit it to model or even make. There's a lot of choices, but you still pick from the laundry list, and that's that. Yeah, in some cases you can do cosmetic differences with tinted windows or racing stripes. Even the stuff you can do there is more limited now. Heard a guy not to long ago bemoaning that it was getting harder and harder to do custom stereo systems in a car because more and more of the smart car stuff is run through the speakers. It's doable, but not something an enthusiast can merely swap in a day or two with a manual and a little know how.
Which means for the option to exist in their universe it has to meet all these criteria: They must approve it. They must prioritize it. They must be capable of doing it. They must find a way to do it that doesn't break something that they approve and prioritize more. And yep, there will be a ton of people happy with that, because they were never going to diverge too much from the game in the book either. Heck, there are people at ENWorld and other forums that would freak out at certain house rule suggestions because then you'd be "making it harder for your players to play at their game." That crowd craves "standards" to the extent of psychotic neurosis.
So yeah, tenbones is correct. If there is any bright spot to all of this, it will be that real table-top RPGs will attract fugitives from behind that curtain, options and all.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
They're trying to be like Apple and create a "D&D Ecosystem" where DM's will invest in all their virtual tchotchkes, and be reluctant to stray out of that ecosystem. And I'm going to put a spin on the "lot of DM's not being satisfied with VTT's". I think WotC doesn't *care* about those DM's... and you prove my point below...
I agree that's the goal. I think I'm just more skeptical of how successful it's going to be.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 11:14:12 AMHasbro has been pretty successful so far encouraging the 5e generation to lean on pre-written modules, but not being able to homebrew takes away a lot of the appeal of DMing, and if DMs don't want to run games on the new system, that's going to hurt the platform considerably.
Welcome to my world. MOST DM's do not homebrew. Most DM's in 5e run only modules. If a DM leaves OneD&D's new ecosystem, if they play their cards right, this new version of D&D will groom players to engage in what is going to be basically a big X-Com game that requires very little if any actual DMing experience. I think they believe they'll capture players and groom them into believing *this* is what RPG's are about.
I wonder if there's good statistics on that, because my experience is the opposite. I had never played in or a run a published module until very recently, and none of the players I grew up around ever used them (for context, I started playing around the year 2000, and most of the players I know in real life fit comfortably into the "nu-school" category (many, but not all, of them still play 5e)). What I've seen on the internet indicates that while 5e modules have a higher presence than 3rd or 4th edition ones did, they're still a minority amongst the actually running campaigns out there.
Out of curiosity, I went and flipped through the LFG listings for 5e on Roll20, and I ballpark it at around 1/3 of them advertising a WOTC-published module, but obviously that's nowhere near a conclusive test. Some of them appear to be the same game advertised several times, but some of them might also be running a module I've never heard of.
There are a few problems with published modules that WOTC is never going to overcome. One is that very few people are going to want to play them more than once. But the bigger issue is that the chief appeal of DM-ing, even to the nu-schoolers (in fact perhaps more so), is the opportunity it grants for unfettered creativity. You just don't get that with published material.
It seems like DMs mostly run modules when 1) they're new to DM-ing, 2) they don't have the time or inclination to do the work themselves, or 3) they're being paid. Those are all fine (except possibly the latter), but the lifeblood of the hobby is passionate DMs that create campaigns out of a love for doing so. Those are the people that keep the game in circulation year after year. They organize the most games, they introduce the most new people to the hobby, and they buy the most books. Even with the culture changes that 5e has brought to the game, I still think that if D&D loses those people, it's going to be disastrous for the game's long-term prospects.
Something I don't see people discussing much about this new VTT is that it runs counter not just to the attitudes of the Old-School of RPG players, but to the Nu-School as well. If you look at design trends in the last few years, all the nu-school darlings (such as PBTA/Forged-in-the-Dark, Cypher System, Etc) are moving in the direction of more abstracted rules. Even chunkier games like the 2d20 system and Savage Worlds have been trending towards abstracting things like time and distance measurement encumbrance, ammunition, etc.
As far as I understand the Nu-School gaming ethos, they like a more meta, more story-focused gaming style. They like to fudge dice or ignore them entirely. They do scripted "cutscenes". They-pre-plan story beats, and let the players make changes to the campaign setting mid-game. The highly automated, rules-as-written, tactical miniatures style of play which this VTT seems to be leaning heavily towards isn't going to be any more conducive to what they want than it is conducive to the more randomized, simulationist playstyle that the OSR likes.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 02:00:08 PM
Something I don't see people discussing much about this new VTT is that it runs counter not just to the attitudes of the Old-School of RPG players, but to the Nu-School as well. If you look at design trends in the last few years, all the nu-school darlings (such as PBTA/Forged-in-the-Dark, Cypher System, Etc) are moving in the direction of more abstracted rules. Even chunkier games like the 2d20 system and Savage Worlds have been trending towards abstracting things like time and distance measurement encumbrance, ammunition, etc.
As far as I understand the Nu-School gaming ethos, they like a more meta, more story-focused gaming style. They like to fudge dice or ignore them entirely. They do scripted "cutscenes". They-pre-plan story beats, and let the players make changes to the campaign setting mid-game. The highly automated, rules-as-written, tactical miniatures style of play which this VTT seems to be leaning heavily towards isn't going to be any more conducive to what they want than it is conducive to the more randomized, simulationist playstyle that the OSR likes.
RPGs are divided into a lot more than two schools. For example, 1980s Champions and Ars Magica are very different than 1970s D&D.
If you're talking about PBTA and Forged-in-the-Dark, I don't think your description is accurate. I've played a lot of PBTA along with its predecessors, though only a little Forged-in-the-Dark. These games are more meta-game and story focused. However, in my experience, the gamers are hugely against any dice fudging or prescripted scenes and story beats. They are all about improvising based on whatever the dice tell them. Improvisation and collaboration are core to the experience, and the systems are designed so that the results can be interpreted in dramatic ways.
Prescripted scenes are more a feature of the 1990s era cinematic RPGs. They have their roots in Dragonlance and Shadowrun, and developed more in games like Torg and Deadlands. The story games approach is heavily opposed to this, because prescripting takes away player agency.
EDITED TO ADD: And yes, this approach really isn't very compatible with computerized enhancements - though there are some features that could help it in VTT. I played my first Forged-in-the-Dark game ("Wicked Ones") online as my group had split apart during the pandemic. We did have some aids like putting tags/descriptors down on the map, but that's very different than animated widgets or 3d play space.
I suspect in a decade D&D won't be synonymous with TTRPG anymore. It'll be more like MMOs.
That could leave existing TTRPG forgotten with only those already in the know really aware of them without D&D or it could be a reset to days like the early 80s when the hobby was less well known.
Quote from: jhkim on October 12, 2022, 02:14:24 PM
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 02:00:08 PM
Something I don't see people discussing much about this new VTT is that it runs counter not just to the attitudes of the Old-School of RPG players, but to the Nu-School as well. If you look at design trends in the last few years, all the nu-school darlings (such as PBTA/Forged-in-the-Dark, Cypher System, Etc) are moving in the direction of more abstracted rules. Even chunkier games like the 2d20 system and Savage Worlds have been trending towards abstracting things like time and distance measurement encumbrance, ammunition, etc.
As far as I understand the Nu-School gaming ethos, they like a more meta, more story-focused gaming style. They like to fudge dice or ignore them entirely. They do scripted "cutscenes". They-pre-plan story beats, and let the players make changes to the campaign setting mid-game. The highly automated, rules-as-written, tactical miniatures style of play which this VTT seems to be leaning heavily towards isn't going to be any more conducive to what they want than it is conducive to the more randomized, simulationist playstyle that the OSR likes.
RPGs are divided into a lot more than two schools. For example, 1980s Champions and Ars Magica are very different than 1970s D&D.
If you're talking about PBTA and Forged-in-the-Dark, I don't think your description is accurate. I've played a lot of PBTA along with its predecessors, though only a little Forged-in-the-Dark. These games are more meta-game and story focused. However, in my experience, the gamers are hugely against any dice fudging or prescripted scenes and story beats. They are all about improvising based on whatever the dice tell them. Improvisation and collaboration are core to the experience, and the systems are designed so that the results can be interpreted in dramatic ways.
Prescripted scenes are more a feature of the 1990s era cinematic RPGs. They have their roots in Dragonlance and Shadowrun, and developed more in games like Torg and Deadlands. The story games approach is heavily opposed to this, because prescripting takes away player agency.
EDITED TO ADD: And yes, this approach really isn't very compatible with computerized enhancements - though there are some features that could help it in VTT. I played my first Forged-in-the-Dark game ("Wicked Ones") online as my group had split apart during the pandemic. We did have some aids like putting tags/descriptors down on the map, but that's very different than animated widgets or 3d play space.
I'm fully willing to agree that the "OSR vs. Nu-School" dichotomy is flawed; I just use it here because it's easy shorthand, and because its a dichotomy that a lot of grognards believe in whole-heartedly. For the record, I do think there are some broad cultural trends that divide gamers who got into the hobby before and after the rise of internet gaming, but yeah, there's a lot of variety within both groups.
The point I was trying to make is that we shouldn't just assume the Zoomers are going to unquestioningly embrace the OneD&D VTT. Even within the broad "culture-of-play" that the newer hobbyists tend to have, there's are desires that this system doesn't look like it's going to serve.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PM
I wonder if there's good statistics on that, because my experience is the opposite. I had never played in or a run a published module until very recently, and none of the players I grew up around ever used them (for context, I started playing around the year 2000, and most of the players I know in real life fit comfortably into the "nu-school" category (many, but not all, of them still play 5e)). What I've seen on the internet indicates that while 5e modules have a higher presence than 3rd or 4th edition ones did, they're still a minority amongst the actually running campaigns out there.
I have met precisely two GM (outside of the Living game communities) in my nearly 40 years of playing who used published modules and one was a single mother mostly interested in gaming for the sake of social interaction and the other had converted the whole thing into another game system and was essentially playtesting their conversion mechanics (and has since moved on to running a homebrewed campaign in an established fictional universe were everything needs to be converted into the system to be usable).
Everyone else I've ever played with homebrewed their adventures and sometimes their own worlds (I'd guess a roughly 50/50 split on established world or homebrew... D&D is more often homebrew than those running more focused settings like Battletech or Star Wars/Trek or Rifts or World of Darkness). I'm even more extreme in that I tend to design bespoke systems for pretty much everything I run.
Quote from: Ruprecht on October 12, 2022, 02:26:55 PM
I suspect in a decade D&D won't be synonymous with TTRPG anymore. It'll be more like MMOs.
That could leave existing TTRPG forgotten with only those already in the know really aware of them without D&D or it could be a reset to days like the early 80s when the hobby was less well known.
That might not actually be a bad thing.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PM
I agree that's the goal. I think I'm just more skeptical of how successful it's going to be.
I'm hopeful it fails massively OR it succeeds massively. What I, personally, don't want is for it to be middling and cause further distraction by implementing something that muddies the water further.
I want it to fail massively in the sense that WotC is crushed out of existence due to overeach and bad decision-making (which I know will likely never happen). But at least, like the 4e issue, it will be a very hard lesson learned that hopefully will make them go "back to formula" where a good game has the increasingly smaller chance that D&D might be "great" again. And my criteria of "great" is killing some sacred cows, streamlining, more modularity. Removal of ALL political motivated changes since 1e (yes I'll go that far back just to make sure we stamp out the fire.)
Inversely, if it succeeds MASSIVELY, then it will draw new people that effectively will be playing and engaging in another hobby than the one I'm in. I have ZERO contact with Wargamers, I have ZERO contact with Boardgaming concerns at my table. If 1D&D becomes that odd super-success story, it will effectively dilute the D&D player syndrome I currently deal with in the hobby where everyone only knows the current 5e form of D&D with all its political references and assumptions. It will make my life as a GM that runs other games much easier. Likewise anyone wanting to play actual TTRPG's will already be divorced from modern D&D and be actively looking for an alternative experience. I will happily take those folks on.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PM
I wonder if there's good statistics on that, because my experience is the opposite. I had never played in or a run a published module until very recently, and none of the players I grew up around ever used them (for context, I started playing around the year 2000, and most of the players I know in real life fit comfortably into the "nu-school" category (many, but not all, of them still play 5e)). What I've seen on the internet indicates that while 5e modules have a higher presence than 3rd or 4th edition ones did, they're still a minority amongst the actually running campaigns out there.
I suppose you could be right. My experience is most of the locals here - and TTRPG's in Dallas is *very* active. My local FLGS is *immense* (Madness Comics - it's a former Walmart turned into a Temple of Nerdery. It's like a convention there everyday, at least pre-Covid) and it's a sea of people running all the 5e campaigns modules. Homebrewing is a staple for a certain breed of GM that wants to game a bit deeper. While D&D has always had that cache of being the first big game on the scene... 5e has not been good at curating GMing to go offroading. I don't have numbers, but I'm willing to bet the majority of games are very casual, and I don't see a lot of games advertising actual Homebrew settings around here very much. There are definitely groups running modules aplenty.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PMOut of curiosity, I went and flipped through the LFG listings for 5e on Roll20, and I ballpark it at around 1/3 of them advertising a WOTC-published module, but obviously that's nowhere near a conclusive test. Some of them appear to be the same game advertised several times, but some of them might also be running a module I've never heard of.
There are a few problems with published modules that WOTC is never going to overcome. One is that very few people are going to want to play them more than once. But the bigger issue is that the chief appeal of DM-ing, even to the nu-schoolers (in fact perhaps more so), is the opportunity it grants for unfettered creativity. You just don't get that with published material.
It seems like DMs mostly run modules when 1) they're new to DM-ing, 2) they don't have the time or inclination to do the work themselves, or 3) they're being paid. Those are all fine (except possibly the latter), but the lifeblood of the hobby is passionate DMs that create campaigns out of a love for doing so. Those are the people that keep the game in circulation year after year. They organize the most games, they introduce the most new people to the hobby, and they buy the most books. Even with the culture changes that 5e has brought to the game, I still think that if D&D loses those people, it's going to be disastrous for the game's long-term prospects.
This is what I'm counting on. I *want* GM's that Homebrew to break away from the D&D experience. I want them to make their homebrew settings on other systems. I want the TTRPG field to have maximal fertility and it *demands* GM's that want to run their own games and design their own content. We're the rarest of the breed and I see 1D&D as an opportunity. I look at it as the Alien Invasion is going to conclude and the Aliens are off to go play their own new games elsewhere. We, who represent the rest of TTRPG's that want better gaming can continue on and if we do it right create something better together. Or you know... keep slapboxing about our favorite gaming systems. At least, hopefully we won't have to deal with post-modern politics as part of some strain of the hobby. That beast will have moved on.
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 02:33:53 PM
The point I was trying to make is that we shouldn't just assume the Zoomers are going to unquestioningly embrace the OneD&D VTT. Even within the broad "culture-of-play" that the newer hobbyists tend to have, there's are desires that this system doesn't look like it's going to serve.
I agree with this. Sorry if I came across as nitpicking.
I suspect what Hasbro is hoping for is more cross-sell, where gamers of different cultures of play all are nominally playing D&D - which maximizes their network effect. They'd like to support story gamers playing D&D in-person with a lot of improvisation and collaboration, plus tactical gamers playing D&D in-person with battle mats and miniatures, plus computer-tactical gamers playing D&D online with 3d maps and animated miniatures, plus casual social gamers playing D&D online as a social network.
There have been a lot of D&D computer games for decades like Neverwinter Nights and Baldur's Gate. But there was a big divide between the computer games and the tabletop game, which made cross-sell difficult and limited the network effect.
Quote from: jhkim on October 12, 2022, 02:44:38 PM
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 02:33:53 PM
The point I was trying to make is that we shouldn't just assume the Zoomers are going to unquestioningly embrace the OneD&D VTT. Even within the broad "culture-of-play" that the newer hobbyists tend to have, there's are desires that this system doesn't look like it's going to serve.
I agree with this. Sorry if I came across as nitpicking.
No Worries. I probably was conflating two different gaming scenes there.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 02:38:15 PM
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PM
I wonder if there's good statistics on that, because my experience is the opposite. I had never played in or a run a published module until very recently, and none of the players I grew up around ever used them (for context, I started playing around the year 2000, and most of the players I know in real life fit comfortably into the "nu-school" category (many, but not all, of them still play 5e)). What I've seen on the internet indicates that while 5e modules have a higher presence than 3rd or 4th edition ones did, they're still a minority amongst the actually running campaigns out there.
I suppose you could be right. My experience is most of the locals here - and TTRPG's in Dallas is *very* active. My local FLGS is *immense* (Madness Comics - it's a former Walmart turned into a Temple of Nerdery. It's like a convention there everyday, at least pre-Covid) and it's a sea of people running all the 5e campaigns modules. Homebrewing is a staple for a certain breed of GM that wants to game a bit deeper. While D&D has always had that cache of being the first big game on the scene... 5e has not been good at curating GMing to go offroading. I don't have numbers, but I'm willing to bet the majority of games are very casual, and I don't see a lot of games advertising actual Homebrew settings around here very much. There are definitely groups running modules aplenty.
That's where my own selection bias might be showing. I almost never even walk into a gaming store, let alone sit down and play a game. I was fortunate enough to grow up in a town with a high per-capita nerd population, so I played exclusively in home-games with friends and acquaintances for decades, until recently when I switched to online.
I would guess that modules are over-represented at public games, game stores, conventions, etc, because they allow you to sit down and play with strangers while still having a reasonable idea of what to expect. Meanwhile, homebrew is probably much more common with home games and long-running players. Online, it seems like modules are still slightly over-represented (likely for the same reason), but maybe not as much as they are in official spaces.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 02:38:15 PM
This is what I'm counting on. I *want* GM's that Homebrew to break away from the D&D experience. I want them to make their homebrew settings on other systems. I want the TTRPG field to have maximal fertility and it *demands* GM's that want to run their own games and design their own content. We're the rarest of the breed and I see 1D&D as an opportunity. I look at it as the Alien Invasion is going to conclude and the Aliens are off to go play their own new games elsewhere. We, who represent the rest of TTRPG's that want better gaming can continue on and if we do it right create something better together. Or you know... keep slapboxing about our favorite gaming systems. At least, hopefully we won't have to deal with post-modern politics as part of some strain of the hobby. That beast will have moved on.
I mostly agree with you there. I'm not even as concerned about the possibility of OneD&D setting bad expectations as some people are. In my experience, the kind of person who is going to want to seek out a freer, more customizable experience doesn't often need to be told it's an option. They'll see the potential for themselves just by looking at D&D and noticing it's flaws. Even before the internet, people who were unsatisfied with D&D managed to find out about Call of Cthulhu, Vampire, etc. Nowadays that's easier than ever. Even if Hasbro manages to lock down the D&D ecosystem, they're a long way away from being able to control Youtube, forums, etc.
Honestly, OneD&D is going to crash and burn, but not really because of any of the stuff talked about here. Let's define what "OneD&D" is being presented as, at least when it comes to VTT: a tighter integration between the rules-system and the VTT experience. I've seen conjecture that this might go as far as creating a more expansive VTT (like 3D models, pre-programmed rules, character sheets, implementations, etc.). Let's also assume that this is at least partly true.
The problem here is scope. As someone running two 5e campaigns for different groups right now, one live and one electronic via VTT, I can tell you that the VTT takes more prep time than the live game by far... and I built terrain and paint models for the live game! A VTT option can work when you have pre-packaged modules that are run exactly as written, with no homebrew rules, classes, or items. But as soon as you start adding, manipulating, changing the content, you are now faced with doing so in the VTT using its interface and tools. And, I cannot stress enough, the time and effort to create a triple-A product (which it would take for WotC to dominate the VTT market) is far beyond the capabilities, much less the desire, of most players and GMs.
Seriously, even something easy like adding a map to roll20 becomes way harder once you want to use dynamic lighting and linked character sheets, and those are well-supported operations in the software. If WotC decides to "MMO" their VTT, the sheer difficulty of adding a single terrain with props, triggers, etc. will be way more prep than the average DM will want to do. A good example is the video game "Solasta", which has a built-in toolset for building adventures. The toolset is good, and pretty robust, and you'll end up spending three times more time in creating your adventure than it takes to play it...
So this will basically leave one of several outcomes for WotC. If they simply build a VTT with all of the present rules, campaigns, items, etc., integrated (sort of a DnDBeyond on steroids), they face the difficulty of moving people away from present VTTs that people have already invested time and money in. If they make "OneD&D" the only VTT option (via licensing restrictions, etc.), then they will lose a huge chunk of players who will stick with what they know and be willing to keep playing 5e (4e redux). And if they create an elaborate "MMO" VTT, most players will only find it useful for running pre-published material, because of the difficulty of creating new content. And it's not like WotC has been pumping out modules at a breakneck pace to this point (now add all the extra effort to put that in the VTT...).
So I just don't see how this works out well for them. Not if they are trying to capture the VTT market for all that sweet micro-transaction money...
Anecdote is not data caveat ... but my experience is that the group more likely to be attracted to the OneD&D platform is Millennials and a slice of their parents. Zoomers seem to show a streak of reaction to the excesses of the day. And really digging deep into my anecdotes, they are also more interested in the more old-school aspects of the games I'm running than their immediate predecessors. It's a pretty small set of anecdote, but it's 100% of the Zoomers all in, 100% of the Millennials all out, and about 50/50 on the Gen Y, Z, or whatever the heck is the trendy word for that prior group. And that's out of about 20 people.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on October 12, 2022, 03:26:56 PM
Honestly, OneD&D is going to crash and burn, but not really because of any of the stuff talked about here. Let's define what "OneD&D" is being presented as, at least when it comes to VTT: a tighter integration between the rules-system and the VTT experience. I've seen conjecture that this might go as far as creating a more expansive VTT (like 3D models, pre-programmed rules, character sheets, implementations, etc.). Let's also assume that this is at least partly true.
...
I agree with all of that with one exception: There are different kinds of crash and burn. From Hindenburg/Titanic to Netscape/AOL all the way to things that do a slow-motion crash over decades and then do another slow burn for 5 years after that. If the crash is slow enough, they might even pull out--which is the difference between IBM and Sears, for example.
Another possibility is the Civilization PC game analogy. There's been six major versions and numerous spin-offs. There aren't many people who really enjoyed Civ II who also enjoy Civ V, let alone Civ VI. It's arguably not the same game anymore except for the subject material and a few traditions (e.g. Romans and Indian being in the first set of each new version.) That's not nearly as extreme as what OneD&D is trying here, and it is over a shorter time frame compared to OD&D to current, yet the audience for the original is gone.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 12, 2022, 03:39:38 PM
Quote from: Eirikrautha on October 12, 2022, 03:26:56 PM
Honestly, OneD&D is going to crash and burn, but not really because of any of the stuff talked about here. Let's define what "OneD&D" is being presented as, at least when it comes to VTT: a tighter integration between the rules-system and the VTT experience. I've seen conjecture that this might go as far as creating a more expansive VTT (like 3D models, pre-programmed rules, character sheets, implementations, etc.). Let's also assume that this is at least partly true.
...
I agree with all of that with one exception: There are different kinds of crash and burn. From Hindenburg/Titanic to Netscape/AOL all the way to things that do a slow-motion crash over decades and then do another slow burn for 5 years after that. If the crash is slow enough, they might even pull out--which is the difference between IBM and Sears, for example.
Another possibility is the Civilization PC game analogy. There's been six major versions and numerous spin-offs. There aren't many people who really enjoyed Civ II who also enjoy Civ V, let alone Civ VI. It's arguably not the same game anymore except for the subject material and a few traditions (e.g. Romans and Indian being in the first set of each new version.) That's not nearly as extreme as what OneD&D is trying here, and it is over a shorter time frame compared to OD&D to current, yet the audience for the original is gone.
I hear you on the Civ thing--enjoyed every version from I through IV, but V & VI left me cold. In RPG terms, I think D&D 4e was the same thing--it really turned people off, so much that (briefly) WOTC lost the market lead to Paizo. It was a different game.
TTRPGs are a different thing than VTTRPG, though of course some will be interested in both (and far more people will be interested in neither). But FWIW, if I want to be on the computer, I'd probably pay Skyrim or something made for that environment, and not a VTTRPG experience. It seems to me that VTTRPGs are sort of "making the best of people not being in the same room" rather than the experience that is sought in and of itself. In most every case, I'd rather be with a group of warm bodies in a room than virtual heads on the internet.
I believe there will always be good gaming going on; outside of the latest and greatest edition of WOTC D&D. Especially, outside of WOTC's published adventures. I also believe there will always be division, in what is called the OSR. If only the OSR could experience a strong sense of unity. I guess the closest thing to unity, is the popularity of B/X variants.
Quote from: Jam The MF on October 12, 2022, 05:57:14 PM
I believe there will always be good gaming going on; outside of the latest and greatest edition of WOTC D&D. Especially, outside of WOTC's published adventures. I also believe there will always be division, in what is called the OSR. If only the OSR could experience a strong sense of unity. I guess the closest thing to unity, is the popularity of B/X variants.
Why? The OSR really is diverse, in the meaningful sense of the term, not the woke version. In fact, it's so diverse that it is barely a thing. That's it's best feature. Getting away from "unity" is part of the reason to get away from WotC.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 12, 2022, 03:30:17 PM
Anecdote is not data caveat ... but my experience is that the group more likely to be attracted to the OneD&D platform is Millennials and a slice of their parents. Zoomers seem to show a streak of reaction to the excesses of the day. And really digging deep into my anecdotes, they are also more interested in the more old-school aspects of the games I'm running than their immediate predecessors.
Ditto here, as far as anecdotal experience goes. My latest Gen Z player wanted to make absolutely sure that "resource management" was taken seriously in our game before he joined.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on October 12, 2022, 03:30:17 PMIt's a pretty small set of anecdote, but it's 100% of the Zoomers all in, 100% of the Millennials all out, and about 50/50 on the Gen Y, Z, or whatever the heck is the trendy word for that prior group. And that's out of about 20 people.
;D Gen Y and Gen Z are the aforementioned Millennials and Zoomers respectively. The prior generation is Gen X.
This lady has some interesting points about the One D&D VTT:
Granted, based on a few things she says; I don't think that she'd willingly appear on Inappropriate Characters anytime this century.
But she does make some good points about how WotC is actively trying to bring in monetization practices from the videogame industry.
I suspect they don't care as much about past users and expect to bring in a lot of new users.
Imagine your a kid who has wanted to play D&D and on a whim you go to the Wizard site and they've got a stable of DMs with a game starting every hour or so. You can jump in and play. The virtual tabletop has more of a wow factor than looking at a table with player sheets and die so you're impressed and have a good enough time you'll come back for more.
I believe that is what they are counting on. Of course I could be wrong or I could be right and they are wrong about how many players would be drawn in that way.
I'm curious how they'll manage Critical Role.
Quote from: Ruprecht on October 12, 2022, 10:36:09 AM
They are creating something new. Not a tabletop RPG but not an MMO. This might be ideal for isolated gamers. It might be like popping into an MMO but there is a human brain behind much of it so its not just fighting. It may be an even better for bringing in newbies than current models. It will probably live alongside tabletop RPG as the experience will be so different.
It may be really great for whichever games fill the vacuum that is likely to develop in the table-top space when the Coastal Wizards concentrate on digital.
Thing is. This is not anything new. Theres been these things for like 20 years now and even further back to the original Neverwinter Online where DM staff could creat some things on the fly. Rudimentary and oft simplistic, but there and things only got more adaptable as others tried their hand at some sort of VTT like the old WebRPG system way back in 1999. That was all text if I recall right. But. You could adapt it to about any system. I used it to run Dragon Storm sessions with a few customers and other users had gurps going on it and WOD games. For something so old it was a heck of alot user friendly than 'modern' VTTs have been.
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on October 11, 2022, 06:34:36 PMFive years from now there are going to be 2-5x as many people actually playing "tabletop RPGs" via a smartphone or computer application than have cumulatively EVER played ANY and EVERY RPG that has ever been published in dead tree form. The writing is and has been on the wall, you can struggle against the tide but it will only ever pull you under if so, best to adapt and find a way to make a living off the new revenue streams. I will always personally prefer playing IN PERSON with friends but the reality is that this kind of game is going to be something like 1 in a thousand once the big virtual RPG market really takes hold, and it WILL take hold.
Not going to happen. Don't get me wrong Wizards/Hasbro will come out with something that is D&D branded and it will be popular but it won't supplant tabletop RPGs. It will just become is own unique niche in the same way CRPGS grew from being D&D on the computer into their own thing by the late nineties.
Why? Because the foundation of tabletop RPG is the flexibility that is created by it's core mechanics. The loop between description and adjudication between the referee and players. I played CRPGS, MMORPGS, and LARPS since the 80s and nothing matches Tabletop RPGs flexibility. There are good reasons why CRPGs and MMORPGS grew to be way larger hobbies than TTRPGS. They are easier to get into and more convenient but their limitations along with the limitations of other types of roleplaying games like LARPS are why TTRPGS continue to thrive and prosper.
The hobby will likely shrink but that will be more a result of being in the midst of a fad right now. Those on the fringe will find adjacent hobbies more appealing including whatever scheme Hasbro adopts for One D&D. But for the hobby itself, hobbyists are quite capable of taking care of things and keep it and its industry going and growing. The barriers are low and there there is a wealth of open content for the most popular systems if WIzards decide on doing something that is not tabletop roleplaying.
Keep in mind we are at this point right now despite computer gaming being more spectacular and popular than ever before. We can survive and more importantly thrive Wizards having another brain fart.
Quote from: Omega on October 12, 2022, 11:28:43 PM
Thing is. This is not anything new. Theres been these things for like 20 years now and even further back to the original Neverwinter Online where DM staff could creat some things on the fly.
Yup even ran a campaign with NWN when the community got the server side of things sorted out.
Based on that experience and modding games in general, my prediction is that whatever Wizards winds up doing the most likely outcome will be that it occupies the same niche for VTTs as Dwarven Forge does for face-to-face. Something that looks great, but its nuances and costs limit its appeal. I think what Wizards makes will be more popular and easier to use than DF. But the steep learning curve of dealing with 3D stuff let alone creating them means to use it to the fullest will take more time than most have for a hobby. And the pre-canned stuff will prove too stifling in the long run.
But it may prove to be a dominant VTT if they get the standard VTT features working well alongside the 3D stuff. But there the fact it will be a one-note wonder supporting a single edition, One D&D, will limit its appeal.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
... They're trying to be like Apple and create a "D&D Ecosystem" where DM's will invest in all their virtual tchotchkes, and be reluctant to stray out of that ecosystem. And I'm going to put a spin on the "lot of DM's not being satisfied with VTT's". I think WotC doesn't *care* about those DM's... and you prove my point below...
... MOST DM's do not homebrew. Most DM's in 5e run only modules. If a DM leaves OneD&D's new ecosystem, if they play their cards right, this new version of D&D will groom players to engage in what is going to be basically a big X-Com game that requires very little if any actual DMing experience. I think they believe they'll capture players and groom them into believing *this* is what RPG's are about.
I think that WotC devs know that 6 session "campaigns" do not reliably turn casual players into the RPG hobbyists that GM games.
Like I said in another thread; they want to make it so "anyone can GM". i.e. AP's and adventures made so that almost anyone can jump in and be a 'paint by the numbers' "GM".
They want to take all the heavy lifting out of GMing to 'democratize' it so that they can keep the player base plugged-in oneVTT.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 02:38:15 PM
...
I'm hopeful it fails massively OR it succeeds massively. ...
If it fails massively WotC can just regroup a few years down the road, still retaining its dominant network effect the whole time. An epic failure of the oneVTT is not a death blow to the one true game. It's just a speed bump.
Which is why I fall strongly into the hoping it succeeds massively camp.
Because:
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 12:37:47 AM
I think this is a good thing for people that don't play 5e (and One D&D when it drops).
As One DnD morphs into a Fantasy X-Com... and becomes more self-involved with the digital space, it will pull its new fans into that realm, a WHOLE lot of people will eventually move on to other things (not TTRPG related). OR they will start looking at other TTRPGs that are new to them.
The faster WotC D&D disappears up its own ass the better it is for the RPG hobby as a whole.
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 12:37:47 AM
The fact of the matter is, for the vast majority of Non-WotC TTRPG's out there, the audience of games comes from GM's that poach D&D players from their tent and show them The Way. That is why all other TTRPG's will follow the line of infinite regression behind D&D... but One D&D is different. I suspect it's business model will make the D&D brand into something so significantly different there will be a big shuffling off of players that find it too restrictive or boardgamey.
This should have two effect: a slight dip in gamers overall, once the initial wave hits after One D&D drops. Then for us long-haul GM's and designers, if we play our cards right, we should be seeing a new blooming of space where gamers that don't leave the hobby completely, will actively look for other gaming experiences outside of D&D. This is an opportunity - not a bad thing.
...
I think that there is great opportunity here for a better #2 RPG to WotC D&D to arise that is not made by Baizuo.
But it will very much be a long game scenario.
I find that this blog post sums up a lot of my feeling on the matter:
I'm Looking For My People, Not More People.https://grumpywizard.home.blog/2022/09/22/more-vs-better/
Quote from: ForgottenF on October 12, 2022, 01:47:11 PM
...
There are a few problems with published modules that WOTC is never going to overcome. One is that very few people are going to want to play them more than once. But the bigger issue is that the chief appeal of DM-ing, even to the nu-schoolers (in fact perhaps more so), is the opportunity it grants for unfettered creativity. You just don't get that with published material.
...
Not so sure about this. Even in the AD&D era many people have talked about how they ran certain modules multiple times, and played modules multiple times under different GM's.
In the oneVTT environment I can easily see players adopting more of a video gamer mentality about 'beating' certain adventures/ modules in different ways...
did they announce the kind of things they would sell with micropayment in such? Historically the problem with Table Top games is you sell product to the DM not the players (at least until splat books tried to change that). This could be an attempt to get more out of players if thy sell you nicer avatars and such.
Quote from: Ruprecht on October 13, 2022, 08:00:38 PM
did they announce the kind of things they would sell with micropayment in such? Historically the problem with Table Top games is you sell product to the DM not the players (at least until splat books tried to change that). This could be an attempt to get more out of players if thy sell you nicer avatars and such.
Its been tried as far back as the late 90s. Never caught on.
The biggest drawback is that these things tend to be massively ephemeral. Anyone who has had experience with MMOs and especially MSOs will likely be aware of this by now.
The other no-sell factor is... It is WOTC. Edition Treadmill-Failure is the only Option-Woke Agenda-WOTC. 5 or so years later 7e will come out and OneD&D will be dropped for their new TwoD&D VTT. Shell out more cash to by the new VTT platform suckers!
Quote from: tenbones on October 12, 2022, 11:54:14 AM
Welcome to my world. MOST DM's do not homebrew. Most DM's in 5e run only modules. If a DM leaves OneD&D's new ecosystem, if they play their cards right, this new version of D&D will groom players to engage in what is going to be basically a big X-Com game that requires very little if any actual DMing experience. I think they believe they'll capture players and groom them into believing *this* is what RPG's are about.
The only place i encountered that is with regular organized play in a hobby store.
What I have seen as far as home campaigns goes is about 75% published material and 25% stuff from other source or homebrews. Why because all of the Wizards adventure supplements are incomplete as far as a full campaign goes. So 5e DMs fill in the gaps using suggestions from the adventures or their own ideas. It is not particularly elaborate but it is not a situation where they are running cookie-cutter campaigns with the agenda set by some published product either.
The reason organized play campaigns are different is that there is a continual series of packets sent out to the stores that fill in the gaps left by the main adventures. In theory these can be obtained for use for a home campaign but as it been noted before, a large segment of the hobby is not internet savvy enough to know where to look for these downloads. So stuck with these books they have to come up with some of their own stuff.
It may be different with Pathfinder as Paizo tends to be more through in what they cover in their six book series. But the one I seen also have various gaps and lull points where the referee needs to supply their own content to keep the campaign going.