I get that from my own personal experience and the incessant merging of topics into this one. Those will never end. They're going to keep happening probably more and more. My personal experience is that I've been given better service elsewhere and now when I get worse I am disappointed. So what if I can copy the content manually using homebrew, so can someone who who never bought the book. There's no advantage to having bought it. That is so petty and insulting from a user's perspective, I bought into your game and now I'm left to manually copy everything? I bought the book yet you throw me aside as if I didn't buy it? I feel unappreciated. I'm going to greatly hesitate to spend any more money on D&D until my confidence has been restored.
Let's also stop starting over on the following arguments:
You don't have to buy it, no one is forcing you so just stop talking about it.
Yes we don't have to buy it, but we are free to voice our displeasure and try to spark a change.
But if I buy x product from y company I don't get a proof of purchase ...
Yeah well I bought n product from m company and I did get advantage for having proof of purchase. Circular.
That's a false statement. Not having the advantage you wish that it had does not mean your purchase of a physical book loses its other advantages.
That is so petty and insulting from a user's perspective,
There are two ways in which something can be insulting. The first is by the person saying/doing a thing intending it as an insult, which is clearly not the case here. The second is by the person feeling they are being insulted going out of their way to be insulted.
Also, you are stating your own opinion/feelings as though they are the opinions/feelings of everyone that can be referred to as "a user". That's not a helpful thing to do.
I bought the book yet you throw me aside as if I didn't buy it?
You have the book and it does everything that it claimed it would do when you chose to pay whatever price you paid for that book. You have not been thrown aside, and you are not being treated as if you didn't buy it. You've just elected, after the fact of purchase, to try and renegotiate the terms of the deal you agreed to in regards to what you get for what you paid - and you are vilifying the other party for not giving in to your renegotiation demands.
That's a false statement. Not having the advantage you wish that it had does not mean your purchase of a physical book loses its other advantages.
It's not a false statement you just took it out of context so you could hear what you wanted to hear. I have no advantage over a non-book buyer in regard to DDB which is true.
That is so petty and insulting from a user's perspective,
There are two ways in which something can be insulting. The first is by the person saying/doing a thing intending it as an insult, which is clearly not the case here. The second is by the person feeling they are being insulted going out of their way to be insulted.
Anyone can insult someone even if it is unintended due to ignorance. This statement isn't true.
Also, you are stating your own opinion/feelings as though they are the opinions/feelings of everyone that can be referred to as "a user". That's not a helpful thing to do.
I think it is helpful to see it from WotC/DDB's perspective to see how they are treating us. I work for a company that has paying users so I know what it's like to consider things from this perspective.
I bought the book yet you throw me aside as if I didn't buy it?
You have the book and it does everything that it claimed it would do when you chose to pay whatever price you paid for that book. You have not been thrown aside, and you are not being treated as if you didn't buy it. You've just elected, after the fact of purchase, to try and renegotiate the terms of the deal you agreed to in regards to what you get for what you paid - and you are vilifying the other party for not giving in to your renegotiation demands.
We are being treated as if we didn't buy the book by DDB. We are being thrown aside. The rest, yes. Point?
I have no advantage over a non-book buyer in regard to DDB which is true.
I'd say it is as true as it is irrelevant. You don't have an advantage over a non-book buyer in this overly-specific self-selected context, but you also don't have a disadvantage compared to a non-book buyer.
I think it is helpful to see it from WotC/DDB's perspective to see how they are treating us. I work for a company that has paying users so I know what it's like to consider things from this perspective.
Again, "you", not "us". Speaking as if you are speaking for more people than you are doesn't make your point seem any stronger - it actually undercuts it by making it look like even you think the point isn't strong enough on it's own, so it needs to be pumped-up by words that suggest more people are on board with it.
We are being treated as if we didn't buy the book by DDB
No we are not. If we were being treated as if we didn't buy the book, we wouldn't be getting told to home-brew in content as a means of not having to pay for it - because if we hadn't bought the book, we wouldn't even have the info in the first place (at least not legally, and encouraging folks to break laws in this context is actually against the rules of the site, so it's definitely not what is meant by the advice to home-brew in things if you don't want to pay for them).
We are being thrown aside.
No we are not.
The rest, yes. Point?
Making the situation out to be you against a villainous bad-guy company, even though the facts at hand show that no wrong-doing is happening, you just decided the deal you previously were okay with is no longer satisfactory to you, doesn't help your arguments seem reasonable. It's the opposite, actually, as any point or idea you might have - no matter how good - is obscured by the linguistic equivalent of throwing yourself on the floor, and flopping about while shouting about not getting the toy you wanted.
I don't think bundling a digital licence with a book would work both for the practical reasons mentioned and there are those who will never want to pay for digital and then they'll be complaining about the higher price of print to subsidise the rest of us.
But WOTC could sell a digital licence entirely seperate to the books that is good for any digital content whether DDB, Roll 20, FG, the yet to be released reader, or anything else. Maybe they could even sell it in tiers - a single platform licence and an unlimited licence to use on as many platforms as you like.
Platforms could then sell you their value added service either as a subscription, a one-time purchase, or both (as they currently do). (Value added includes the WOTC content, since they still have to convert it.)
I'm not convinced this would reap the savings proponents are seeking as platforms still have to add a markup to the product. And I don't think it's going to happen with 5e.
I had an idea... There could be a way to buy a physical copy and get a digital DDB copy at a discounted rate.
If CURSE became a reseller of physical D&D books on Amazon, they could bundle each physical book they sell with a coupon code towards the purchase of the book on DDB.
Obviously the price would have to be set such that DDB makes a profit to be worth it, but since WotC is unlikely to do this themselves, this seems like the next best thing.
This would, of course, only benefit people who haven't yet bought the physical books.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
But WOTC could sell a digital licence entirely seperate to the books that is good for any digital content whether DDB, Roll 20, FG, the yet to be released reader, or anything else. Maybe they could even sell it in tiers - a single platform licence and an unlimited licence to use on as many platforms as you like.
Platforms could then sell you their value added service either as a subscription, a one-time purchase, or both (as they currently do). (Value added includes the WOTC content, since they still have to convert it.)
I'm not convinced this would reap the savings proponents are seeking as platforms still have to add a markup to the product. And I don't think it's going to happen with 5e.
But I like the idea.
This I could see, and get behind. While DDB is the only digital platform I use for D&D, I do understand the frustration for folks who are already invested in Roll20 and/or Fantasy Grounds, and this seems like a good solution.
Curse is owned by Amazon, which is why I would not be surprised to see Amazon offering a bundle. I still don’t understand why people who purchased a book think they are owed a digital tool along with it (that they were not in any way promised when they bought the book), but I’d love to see Amazon selling a package deal, which would be great for new players.
I understand the frustration, too. Sure we are paying for a digital tool and that's ok. But we are also paying for the content of the book. Creating this content (rules and adventures) cost money. You can build the cost of the book by adding that amount to the printing costs, retail, etc. You can also build the cost of DDB by adding the content creation cost to the cost for creating the tools, maintaining the servers, service, etc.
This is why people feel that they are taken advantage of. Because they paid twice for the content creation part. First when buying the book and second when buying on DDB. A remedy would have been the possibility to buy a content license which reduces the cost of all associated products, may it be books or DDB. But this is not how Wizards did it. Because they prefer to earn more money and since it is the standard way of publishing stuff.
Curse made a really good deal with their content sharing agreement. It enables multiple persons to use the same DDB license which saves a lot of money. They should advertise it first and foremost, since it is a really really great deal, especially for people who think they are being taken advantage of.
I don't really care, since my disposable income is easily enough to buy the content twice and since I get literally hundreds of hours of entertainment out of it. I also sell my books on ebay and amazon since they are not used anymore since DDB.
I have no advantage over a non-book buyer in regard to DDB which is true.
I'd say it is as true as it is irrelevant. You don't have an advantage over a non-book buyer in this overly-specific self-selected context, but you also don't have a disadvantage compared to a non-book buyer.
It's relevant from my perspective because without it I am being asked to purchase the content twice which to me is a let down and cause for lack of confidence. Feel free to express why it isn't relevant to you.
I think it is helpful to see it from WotC/DDB's perspective to see how they are treating us. I work for a company that has paying users so I know what it's like to consider things from this perspective.
Again, "you", not "us". Speaking as if you are speaking for more people than you are doesn't make your point seem any stronger - it actually undercuts it by making it look like even you think the point isn't strong enough on it's own, so it needs to be pumped-up by words that suggest more people are on board with it.
I thought I made it clear that this was all my opinion, my perspective. Is this why you feel the need to pick apart every one of my posts? Because you want to make sure everyone knows this is my opinion? Btw you do this too. Rather than saying "We are not being treated a certain way" you should have responded with "I do not feel I am being treated this way" in order to not be a hypocrite here.
We are being treated as if we didn't buy the book by DDB
No we are not. If we were being treated as if we didn't buy the book, we wouldn't be getting told to home-brew in content as a means of not having to pay for it - because if we hadn't bought the book, we wouldn't even have the info in the first place (at least not legally, and encouraging folks to break laws in this context is actually against the rules of the site, so it's definitely not what is meant by the advice to home-brew in things if you don't want to pay for them).
Wait, buyers don't have advantage or disadvantage compared to non-buyers (your words), yet we are not being treated as if we didn't buy the book (also your words)? I'm getting mixed messages from you. Can't have it both ways.
The legal boundaries at this point are (as someone else put it) tacitly expressed. Since they purposefully put themselves in a position that they cannot enforce it, that distinction is irrelevant. So from an enforceability perspective, the homebrew system puts non-buyers and buyers in the same boat.
We are being thrown aside.
No we are not.
Yu huh ...
The rest, yes. Point?
Making the situation out to be you against a villainous bad-guy company, even though the facts at hand show that no wrong-doing is happening, you just decided the deal you previously were okay with is no longer satisfactory to you, doesn't help your arguments seem reasonable. It's the opposite, actually, as any point or idea you might have - no matter how good - is obscured by the linguistic equivalent of throwing yourself on the floor, and flopping about while shouting about not getting the toy you wanted.
If what I were asking for isn't reasonable then there wouldn't be continual posts getting merged into this one where people would hope for it. If what I were asking for wasn't reasonable then it wouldn't be implemented elsewhere. I didn't just decide the deal I made was bad. I'm like Lando, this deal is getting worse all the time. The more reasons they give me to buy the same content again, the worse the deal gets. If my way of expressing my displeasure is getting in your way of receiving good points then that's your problem, not mine. Idk what you want me to do about it.
How is the deal getting worse all the time? The deal you made was to buy physical books. You paid money for them. You received physical books. That's the whole deal.
I had an idea... There could be a way to buy a physical copy and get a digital DDB copy at a discounted rate.
If CURSE became a reseller of physical D&D books on Amazon, they could bundle each physical book they sell with a coupon code towards the purchase of the book on DDB.
Obviously the price would have to be set such that DDB makes a profit to be worth it, but since WotC is unlikely to do this themselves, this seems like the next best thing.
This would, of course, only benefit people who haven't yet bought the physical books.
This would be a good start. Just the effort says something like "Hey we know you're bummed, we're bummed too that we can't at this time offer a better way than repurchasing the same content over and over again, but hey look we're doing what we can to make things better where we can." My dollars are eager to leave my account. It seriously wouldn't take much.
How is the deal getting worse all the time? The deal you made was to buy physical books. You paid money for them. You received physical books. That's the whole deal.
Let me answer by asking how this didn't answer your question?
The more reasons they give me to buy the same content again, the worse the deal gets.
I guess I'll expound since you asked. I bought Phandelver physical box. Later, they came out with it on roll20. Things changed since my original deal which makes it worse. Even though it's a different distributor, it's connected to my deal because it is the same content.
How is the deal getting worse all the time? The deal you made was to buy physical books. You paid money for them. You received physical books. That's the whole deal.
Let me answer by asking how this didn't answer your question?
The more reasons they give me to buy the same content again, the worse the deal gets.
I guess I'll expound since you asked. I bought Phandelver physical box. Later, they came out with it on roll20. Things changed since my original deal which makes it worse. Even though it's a different distributor, it's connected to my deal because it is the same content.
That doesn't make any sense to me. You bought precisely one book, and you still have precisely one book. The fact that that book is available for purchase in other formats does not mean that you were retroactively ripped off when you bought the book.
How is the deal getting worse all the time? The deal you made was to buy physical books. You paid money for them. You received physical books. That's the whole deal.
Let me answer by asking how this didn't answer your question?
The more reasons they give me to buy the same content again, the worse the deal gets.
I guess I'll expound since you asked. I bought Phandelver physical box. Later, they came out with it on roll20. Things changed since my original deal which makes it worse. Even though it's a different distributor, it's connected to my deal because it is the same content.
It would be connected to your deal if suddenly the boxed version of LMoP included the Roll20 version after you purchased it. That would have been changing the basic deal offered in a way that could allow you to feel ripped off/de-appreciated or the like. The fact that someone else starts selling the same product/content you already have, with no direct connection to the product you bought (in this example, the direct connection would be people buying after you having the possibility of unlocking digital with the buy of physical).
WotC did not change how THEY sell their content or their products, they widened the offer by allowing others to sell their content, that in no way diminishes or changes the deal you made with WotC in the first place when you bought your boxes/manuals.
Edit: to spell it out even more clearly: the fact that the content is the same is irrelevant if the medium is different and the medium involved have no interaction with one another beyond the content.
Edit2: I will make an example, one that I have done other times and that I have yet to receive a proper response to (not because I do not accept the replies I got, but because I got none to this): You buy a book. YEARS later, the eBook technology is presented and you'd be interested into it. Your book purchase does not allow you to access the eBook (digital) version of it. Would you demand the eBook to be given to you? Let me point out that many books, especially on Amazon, since the dawn of the eBook offer for a small increase in price the digital version as well, so if you bought your book from Amazon, you could THEORETICALLY feel the deal you got at the time of purchase has lost value. Let me point out again as well that (currently) no such deal is available with D&D content since Roll20/FantasyGrounds/DDB are out.
that could allow you to feel ripped off/de-appreciated or the like.
I don't need an allowance to feel. To me, this is a reasonable reaction to the situation. I'm perplexed that to you it isn't, but you're allowed to feel that way without anyone giving you that allowance. Imagine if I told you that you're not allowed to not feel ripped off.
That doesn't make any sense to me. You bought precisely one book, and you still have precisely one book. The fact that that book is available for purchase in other formats does not mean that you were retroactively ripped off when you bought the book.
You guys are saying ripped off. For me it's more of a let down, a disappointment, or maybe a lack of confidence. I've read here that for a lot of other people it is (or was) too. That's why the first post on this thread even exists, to try to persuade people to get over those reactions. I've also read that for some, it did persuade them. For me, the explanation of why the deals aren't backwards compatible isn't enough to restore my willingness to enter into more deals. It doesn't change the fact that it won't happen again.
Edit: to spell it out even more clearly: the fact that the content is the same is irrelevant if the medium is different and the medium involved have no interaction with one another beyond the content.
Edit2: I will make an example, one that I have done other times and that I have yet to receive a proper response to (not because I do not accept the replies I got, but because I got none to this): You buy a book. YEARS later, the eBook technology is presented and you'd be interested into it. Your book purchase does not allow you to access the eBook (digital) version of it. Would you demand the eBook to be given to you? Let me point out that many books, especially on Amazon, since the dawn of the eBook offer for a small increase in price the digital version as well, so if you bought your book from Amazon, you could THEORETICALLY feel the deal you got at the time of purchase has lost value. Let me point out again as well that (currently) no such deal is available with D&D content since Roll20/FantasyGrounds/DDB are out.
Let me respond to this in 3 parts. Part 1 is a reference to this stand off argument which you have reused.
But if I buy x product from y company I don't get a proof of purchase ...
Yeah well I bought n product from m company and I did get advantage for having proof of purchase. Circular.
Part 2. A novel, although a book, is a very different product than the PHB similar to how the PHB is different from Adventure Modules. Even DDB categorizes them separately. A novel is a story that is consumed, the first consumption being the most important hence spoiler alerts. PHB is a set of rules meant to be continually referenced after they are learned.
Part 3. Still, the basis of this whole thing is to take away my allowance to react the way I have which is fundamentally ineffective.
A lack of confidence in what? I'm genuinely perplexed here. A lack of confidence that the same rules won't be made available for purchase in other ways?
Personally, I have zero confidence that the D&D Books won't be made available for purchase in other ways. But that's really not part of my mindset when I decide what to buy today.
I think it might be time for both sides of this to take a pause for a little bit.
From following (and participating here and there) in this thread, it's become clear to me that this is a great example of an emotional vs logical argument.
It's a fairly well-documented phenomenon and in this case, here's a deconstruction:
Person A: "I feel that WotC/DDB have let me down/ripped me off"
Person B: "Here are a bunch of facts that show how this business model works."
(Where Person A and Person B are any number of the people who have posted in this thread).
Notice that Person A is talking about how they FEEL - this is important. Emotional responses often dictate our decisions as much as, sometimes more than, facts.
The response from Person B does not address this feeling AT ALL. This is because Person B does not share that feeling that Person A has, they don't understand it and there is no empathy between them. The facts presented are very unlikely to change how Person A feels about the situation.
Hopefully you can see how this can just go around and around.
I am not saying that people shouldn't debate on these forums, but I do urge people to consider whether you are debating on an emotional level or a logical level.
I think there's another important distinction to be made here: "I wish that there were a more favorable/cheaper pricing structure" vs. "WotC and DDB have behaved unethically in pricing their content the way they have." The first is perfectly valid, even if it's already been said plenty of times. The second, I would take more issue with.
That said, it's perfectly possible for one person to write the first and someone else to read the second in their comment, especially on a forum like this. Personally, I'm getting out of this topic because I don't think there's much left to say that hasn't been said.
It's relevant from my perspective because without it I am being asked to purchase the content twice which to me is a let down and cause for lack of confidence. Feel free to express why it isn't relevant to you.
Primarily because of details like that Curse is not WotC, and neither are any of the rest of the companies offering digital offerings, so treating Curse asking you to pay as the same as WotC asking you to pay again - full stop - isn't accurate, nor reasonable, and because it really shouldn't matter whether Curse is saying "Pay X for each book" or "Pay X for our tools" or "Pay X to feed our pet cat Reginald", just whether X is worth what you get should you pay for it.
I thought I made it clear that this was all my opinion, my perspective. Is this why you feel the need to pick apart every one of my posts? Because you want to make sure everyone knows this is my opinion? Btw you do this too. Rather than saying "We are not being treated a certain way" you should have responded with "I do not feel I am being treated this way" in order to not be a hypocrite here.
No, it's not clear that someone using phrases like "We are being thrown aside" is only meaning "I feel I am being thrown aside" rather than what the words they actually chose actually mean. And me being a hypocrite in this context is entirely a fiction of your mind - I've not made any claims phrased as everyone feeling the way I do, nor even multiple people feeling the way I do, I have only pointed out that your "we" is not accurate because it doesn't include me.
I'm getting mixed messages from you. Can't have it both ways.
In cases, like this one, where details are not mutually exclusive, yes we can have it both ways. There is no mixed message - every user of D&D Beyond is being treated equally by Curse, and part of that treatment is being assumed to have a legally acquired physical rule-book, if having a physical rule book at all, rather than have illegally acquired the information that can be found in said book in some way.
If what I were asking for isn't reasonable then there wouldn't be continual posts getting merged into this one where people would hope for it.
It's not a safe assumption to assume that only reasonable ideas are shared by numerous people.
If what I were asking for wasn't reasonable then it wouldn't be implemented elsewhere.
Every example of "elsewhere" involves significant differences in circumstances and resources. What is reasonable to expect in one circumstance is not inherently reasonable to expect in another circumstance.
I didn't just decide the deal I made was bad. I'm like Lando, this deal is getting worse all the time.
The deal was made, you got what you paid for, and that's it. The deal you made has not changed... unless you are saying that someone took something that you paid for away from you, or you are being forced into paying an additional cost and not getting anything new in return.
If my way of expressing my displeasure is getting in your way of receiving good points then that's your problem, not mine.
It's not getting in my way. It really doesn't even matter to me - you are just some random dude on the internet to me. Why I mentioned that the way you express your points is problematic is because it's getting in your way, and I wasn't sure you realized that, so I tried to help. Because who knows, if enough people share your opinion and manage to express themselves in a way that allows they to seem reasonable, maybe you'll actually get something more like what you want?
I get that from my own personal experience and the incessant merging of topics into this one. Those will never end. They're going to keep happening probably more and more. My personal experience is that I've been given better service elsewhere and now when I get worse I am disappointed. So what if I can copy the content manually using homebrew, so can someone who who never bought the book. There's no advantage to having bought it. That is so petty and insulting from a user's perspective, I bought into your game and now I'm left to manually copy everything? I bought the book yet you throw me aside as if I didn't buy it? I feel unappreciated. I'm going to greatly hesitate to spend any more money on D&D until my confidence has been restored.
Let's also stop starting over on the following arguments:
Yes we don't have to buy it, but we are free to voice our displeasure and try to spark a change.
Yeah well I bought n product from m company and I did get advantage for having proof of purchase. Circular.
That's a false statement. Not having the advantage you wish that it had does not mean your purchase of a physical book loses its other advantages.
There are two ways in which something can be insulting. The first is by the person saying/doing a thing intending it as an insult, which is clearly not the case here. The second is by the person feeling they are being insulted going out of their way to be insulted.Also, you are stating your own opinion/feelings as though they are the opinions/feelings of everyone that can be referred to as "a user". That's not a helpful thing to do.
You have the book and it does everything that it claimed it would do when you chose to pay whatever price you paid for that book. You have not been thrown aside, and you are not being treated as if you didn't buy it. You've just elected, after the fact of purchase, to try and renegotiate the terms of the deal you agreed to in regards to what you get for what you paid - and you are vilifying the other party for not giving in to your renegotiation demands.I think it is helpful to see it from WotC/DDB's perspective to see how they are treating us. I work for a company that has paying users so I know what it's like to consider things from this perspective.
I'd say it is as true as it is irrelevant. You don't have an advantage over a non-book buyer in this overly-specific self-selected context, but you also don't have a disadvantage compared to a non-book buyer.
Again, "you", not "us". Speaking as if you are speaking for more people than you are doesn't make your point seem any stronger - it actually undercuts it by making it look like even you think the point isn't strong enough on it's own, so it needs to be pumped-up by words that suggest more people are on board with it.
No we are not. If we were being treated as if we didn't buy the book, we wouldn't be getting told to home-brew in content as a means of not having to pay for it - because if we hadn't bought the book, we wouldn't even have the info in the first place (at least not legally, and encouraging folks to break laws in this context is actually against the rules of the site, so it's definitely not what is meant by the advice to home-brew in things if you don't want to pay for them).
No we are not.
Making the situation out to be you against a villainous bad-guy company, even though the facts at hand show that no wrong-doing is happening, you just decided the deal you previously were okay with is no longer satisfactory to you, doesn't help your arguments seem reasonable. It's the opposite, actually, as any point or idea you might have - no matter how good - is obscured by the linguistic equivalent of throwing yourself on the floor, and flopping about while shouting about not getting the toy you wanted.I don't think bundling a digital licence with a book would work both for the practical reasons mentioned and there are those who will never want to pay for digital and then they'll be complaining about the higher price of print to subsidise the rest of us.
But WOTC could sell a digital licence entirely seperate to the books that is good for any digital content whether DDB, Roll 20, FG, the yet to be released reader, or anything else. Maybe they could even sell it in tiers - a single platform licence and an unlimited licence to use on as many platforms as you like.
Platforms could then sell you their value added service either as a subscription, a one-time purchase, or both (as they currently do). (Value added includes the WOTC content, since they still have to convert it.)
I'm not convinced this would reap the savings proponents are seeking as platforms still have to add a markup to the product. And I don't think it's going to happen with 5e.
But I like the idea.
I had an idea... There could be a way to buy a physical copy and get a digital DDB copy at a discounted rate.
If CURSE became a reseller of physical D&D books on Amazon, they could bundle each physical book they sell with a coupon code towards the purchase of the book on DDB.
Obviously the price would have to be set such that DDB makes a profit to be worth it, but since WotC is unlikely to do this themselves, this seems like the next best thing.
This would, of course, only benefit people who haven't yet bought the physical books.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Curse is owned by Amazon, which is why I would not be surprised to see Amazon offering a bundle. I still don’t understand why people who purchased a book think they are owed a digital tool along with it (that they were not in any way promised when they bought the book), but I’d love to see Amazon selling a package deal, which would be great for new players.
I understand the frustration, too. Sure we are paying for a digital tool and that's ok. But we are also paying for the content of the book. Creating this content (rules and adventures) cost money. You can build the cost of the book by adding that amount to the printing costs, retail, etc. You can also build the cost of DDB by adding the content creation cost to the cost for creating the tools, maintaining the servers, service, etc.
This is why people feel that they are taken advantage of. Because they paid twice for the content creation part. First when buying the book and second when buying on DDB. A remedy would have been the possibility to buy a content license which reduces the cost of all associated products, may it be books or DDB. But this is not how Wizards did it. Because they prefer to earn more money and since it is the standard way of publishing stuff.
Curse made a really good deal with their content sharing agreement. It enables multiple persons to use the same DDB license which saves a lot of money. They should advertise it first and foremost, since it is a really really great deal, especially for people who think they are being taken advantage of.
I don't really care, since my disposable income is easily enough to buy the content twice and since I get literally hundreds of hours of entertainment out of it. I also sell my books on ebay and amazon since they are not used anymore since DDB.
It's relevant from my perspective because without it I am being asked to purchase the content twice which to me is a let down and cause for lack of confidence. Feel free to express why it isn't relevant to you.
Wait, buyers don't have advantage or disadvantage compared to non-buyers (your words), yet we are not being treated as if we didn't buy the book (also your words)? I'm getting mixed messages from you. Can't have it both ways.
The legal boundaries at this point are (as someone else put it) tacitly expressed. Since they purposefully put themselves in a position that they cannot enforce it, that distinction is irrelevant. So from an enforceability perspective, the homebrew system puts non-buyers and buyers in the same boat.
Yu huh ...
How is the deal getting worse all the time? The deal you made was to buy physical books. You paid money for them. You received physical books. That's the whole deal.
Quote from Kreakdude >>
That would have been changing the basic deal offered in a way that could allow you to feel ripped off/de-appreciated or the like. The fact that someone else starts selling the same product/content you already have, with no direct connection to the product you bought (in this example, the direct connection would be people buying after you having the possibility of unlocking digital with the buy of physical).
I will make an example, one that I have done other times and that I have yet to receive a proper response to (not because I do not accept the replies I got, but because I got none to this):
You buy a book. YEARS later, the eBook technology is presented and you'd be interested into it. Your book purchase does not allow you to access the eBook (digital) version of it.
Would you demand the eBook to be given to you?
Let me point out that many books, especially on Amazon, since the dawn of the eBook offer for a small increase in price the digital version as well, so if you bought your book from Amazon, you could THEORETICALLY feel the deal you got at the time of purchase has lost value.
Let me point out again as well that (currently) no such deal is available with D&D content since Roll20/FantasyGrounds/DDB are out.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
You guys are saying ripped off. For me it's more of a let down, a disappointment, or maybe a lack of confidence. I've read here that for a lot of other people it is (or was) too. That's why the first post on this thread even exists, to try to persuade people to get over those reactions. I've also read that for some, it did persuade them. For me, the explanation of why the deals aren't backwards compatible isn't enough to restore my willingness to enter into more deals. It doesn't change the fact that it won't happen again.
Part 2. A novel, although a book, is a very different product than the PHB similar to how the PHB is different from Adventure Modules. Even DDB categorizes them separately. A novel is a story that is consumed, the first consumption being the most important hence spoiler alerts. PHB is a set of rules meant to be continually referenced after they are learned.
Part 3. Still, the basis of this whole thing is to take away my allowance to react the way I have which is fundamentally ineffective.
A lack of confidence in what? I'm genuinely perplexed here. A lack of confidence that the same rules won't be made available for purchase in other ways?
Personally, I have zero confidence that the D&D Books won't be made available for purchase in other ways. But that's really not part of my mindset when I decide what to buy today.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersI think it might be time for both sides of this to take a pause for a little bit.
From following (and participating here and there) in this thread, it's become clear to me that this is a great example of an emotional vs logical argument.
It's a fairly well-documented phenomenon and in this case, here's a deconstruction:
Person A: "I feel that WotC/DDB have let me down/ripped me off"
Person B: "Here are a bunch of facts that show how this business model works."
(Where Person A and Person B are any number of the people who have posted in this thread).
Notice that Person A is talking about how they FEEL - this is important. Emotional responses often dictate our decisions as much as, sometimes more than, facts.
The response from Person B does not address this feeling AT ALL. This is because Person B does not share that feeling that Person A has, they don't understand it and there is no empathy between them. The facts presented are very unlikely to change how Person A feels about the situation.
Hopefully you can see how this can just go around and around.
I am not saying that people shouldn't debate on these forums, but I do urge people to consider whether you are debating on an emotional level or a logical level.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
This is a point well-raised, Stormknight.
I think there's another important distinction to be made here: "I wish that there were a more favorable/cheaper pricing structure" vs. "WotC and DDB have behaved unethically in pricing their content the way they have." The first is perfectly valid, even if it's already been said plenty of times. The second, I would take more issue with.
That said, it's perfectly possible for one person to write the first and someone else to read the second in their comment, especially on a forum like this. Personally, I'm getting out of this topic because I don't think there's much left to say that hasn't been said.
Primarily because of details like that Curse is not WotC, and neither are any of the rest of the companies offering digital offerings, so treating Curse asking you to pay as the same as WotC asking you to pay again - full stop - isn't accurate, nor reasonable, and because it really shouldn't matter whether Curse is saying "Pay X for each book" or "Pay X for our tools" or "Pay X to feed our pet cat Reginald", just whether X is worth what you get should you pay for it.
No, it's not clear that someone using phrases like "We are being thrown aside" is only meaning "I feel I am being thrown aside" rather than what the words they actually chose actually mean. And me being a hypocrite in this context is entirely a fiction of your mind - I've not made any claims phrased as everyone feeling the way I do, nor even multiple people feeling the way I do, I have only pointed out that your "we" is not accurate because it doesn't include me.
In cases, like this one, where details are not mutually exclusive, yes we can have it both ways. There is no mixed message - every user of D&D Beyond is being treated equally by Curse, and part of that treatment is being assumed to have a legally acquired physical rule-book, if having a physical rule book at all, rather than have illegally acquired the information that can be found in said book in some way.
It's not a safe assumption to assume that only reasonable ideas are shared by numerous people.
Every example of "elsewhere" involves significant differences in circumstances and resources. What is reasonable to expect in one circumstance is not inherently reasonable to expect in another circumstance.
The deal was made, you got what you paid for, and that's it. The deal you made has not changed... unless you are saying that someone took something that you paid for away from you, or you are being forced into paying an additional cost and not getting anything new in return.
It's not getting in my way. It really doesn't even matter to me - you are just some random dude on the internet to me. Why I mentioned that the way you express your points is problematic is because it's getting in your way, and I wasn't sure you realized that, so I tried to help. Because who knows, if enough people share your opinion and manage to express themselves in a way that allows they to seem reasonable, maybe you'll actually get something more like what you want?