Regardless of their reasons, I bought al la cart here instead of on roll20 because it was more convenient.
Now, I have already started switching fully over to roll20. I have beta tested for them and I know what's coming, and I believe it will be better. The Al la Cart kept me loyal through last year's debacle, but this? No way am I putting up with this.
Certainly not buying the new books except on roll20...where all of my adventures are as well. Not buying print books either.
If I only had a little to spend, I could buy just the things I needed now, and then later buy the whole book without having 'wasted' any money or having to pay twice. And when there is only a few dollars left to get the rest of it, then why not,
Now, I might not buy anything at all because I might not have the money up front for all of it, and that expendable income might go to something else instead now.
but I'm a dab hand at homebrew and plan to release something pretty substantial, once I get my head around how to be successful in the crowd funding route.
Short answer is, don't waste the time chasing that model. Get a DM's Guild account and start releasing content either for free or for cheap to build an audience and prove you can make good material that people want. Then, once you have an audience, turn it towards monetizing bigger projects.
Much appreciated, and thank you for the guidance!
But this is probably a digression, and we should keep on topic.
Don't get a DMs Guild account. Just sell on regular drivethrurpg marketplace. While you get access to all that nifty trade dress in the DMs Guild, you also open yourself up to Hasbro harvesting your product and taking it over without credit or proper payment for your hard word.
It's funny you think that WotC would waste time doing that for "DrivethruRPG, but with D&D set dressing" but not for regular DrivethruRPG. It's the same site. Just use the version that will get you to an audience.
It's run by the same company (Onebookshelf) but the rules for posting on both are completely different, like the other partner sub-sites. What you're saying is incorrect. DMSGuild gives you the ability to use all D&D IP and they can take your content if they wished. I'm not aware of them ever actually doing this without compensation. On DriveThru they cannot do this and you cannot use D&D IP. Also the percentage of money you earn is quite different and you make more money on DriveThru because DMSGuild takes a larger cut. But yes indeed, the audience for D&D is obviously larger on DMSGuild - which is the tradeoff you make for less money.
Not to sidetrack even further, but another important distinction between the two: on DMs Guild you can only post content that uses approved official D&D settings (currently: Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Eberron, Ravnica, Theros, Arcavios (Strixhaven), and Spelljammer) or setting agnostic content (no homebrewed cities, towns, worlds, etc.).
But I think it's a fair point. When Independant creators are able to churn out well balanced subclasses, Feats, magic items, and even adventures with a high degree of regularity, why can't WOTC, with their *significantly* higher degree of resources do the same? Yes there are only so many books you can release before you cause fatigue. But they could provide much better content within the ones they have.
Are they really better than Wizards' stuff though? What about them makes it better than Wizards' content? I do not see this perceived quality increase that third party content has over official content. Granted I do not care much for third party content in general so I have not seen much, but I have not seen anything that amazed me either out of the stuff that I do see. If anything, I find more interesting things and get more inspirations outside of the TTRPG space than in it. The only two things that third party can potentially do better than Wizards is on price of content, and the organization of the content.
Another thing to consider is convenience and quality of life experience. Wizards and Paizo can provide everything you need to run a game smoothly and easily. As a GM, one of my most important tools are monster cards and Beyond's monster database. Paizo got a database and cards too, but I am not aware of any other game that has their own database of monsters or sell their own monster cards. Additionally, looking up rules is way easier with Beyond, and while Beyond's search does suck, with how popular D&D is, you will have an easier time looking things up on Google compared to another game. And as horribly monolingual Beyond is, Wizards as a whole is not, and you can share the joys of D&D with people who speak a different language than you with the physical books in different languages. It is going to be extremely difficult to communicate, but you can do hack-and-slash and dungeon crawling games and rely on the boardgame aspect of D&D.
And most uniquely, I do not know of any other TTRPG that lets you purchase piecemeal content at Beyond's level of granularity and scale. D&D and Beyond no longer has it either, hence this sad PSA thread, but it did have it at one point!
It feels a bit preemptive to be phasing out older content for OneDnD when it feels like people are barely even considering it so far.
I've seen some mild interest and looking over of the playtests but little to no people excited to fully adopt it.
As far as I'm aware it's not even done testing.
Playtest is over. The PHB is in final print review, the next step is going to press. Honestly, while I think it might be a little premature, I can see the logic of removing 2014 piecemeal content being put under Legacy in preparation for 2024. Here's the discussion of the galley reading process a couple of weeks back:
Was the idea that OneDnD is Backwards Compatible with 5e scrapped?
If not, I don't see what the harm in the legacy piecemeal content still existing is.
(Honestly I didn't think they were in the right for making the Volo's versions of old races unbuyable either.)
I just wonder how much of a difference in the revision of the rules there is that the ability to construct the a-la-carte segments requires a complete shutdown this soon?
I could understand if a complete overhaul of the core database code, it’s reaching the 10yr milestone and probably looks like a hoarder storage shed, is required but this isn’t how to handle it.
This however, reeks of corporate stupidity, employees are only following orders frantically signing it’s bad while having to give their official response.
If some corporate a-hole doesn’t get their yearly $500,000 bonus because of stupid decisions of late, well then cry me a river and see if I give a $h!t.
( this is again, pointing out the elephant in the room, not meant to inflame. )
D&D is an RPG that works game wise more like Minecraft, than monopoly. A-la-carte was the mod packs of the D&D core, that could be added to the most basic rules to custom build not only players characters but the eventual expansion in a custom universe of ones own creation. Sure we can still do all those things, but now it’s 5 times harder, and expensive. Far too much of what this site offers can be discovered outside, but at least here most of it could be acquired for a reasonable price. But as being noted, that is no longer a service.
If corporate wants to complain about being under- monetized, this is sure as hell not the way to do it.
I could be utterly descriptive of what I think of the corporate leadership of WotC & Hasbro, but I will let you imagine the words and displeasure one feels when one has been blatantly bent over.
It feels a bit preemptive to be phasing out older content for OneDnD when it feels like people are barely even considering it so far.
I've seen some mild interest and looking over of the playtests but little to no people excited to fully adopt it.
As far as I'm aware it's not even done testing.
Playtest is over. The PHB is in final print review, the next step is going to press. Honestly, while I think it might be a little premature, I can see the logic of removing 2014 piecemeal content being put under Legacy in preparation for 2024. Here's the discussion of the galley reading process a couple of weeks back:
Was the idea that OneDnD is Backwards Compatible with 5e scrapped?
If not, I don't see what the harm in the legacy piecemeal content still existing is.
(Honestly I didn't think they were in the right for making the Volo's versions of old races unbuyable either.)
You're answering your own question there. The 2024 D&D will be compatible with 2014 content, but MMM superseding Volo's and Mord's and the content of those older books becoming available only through Legacy access is exactly how I expect 2024 to roll out (everyone forgets MMM was a peak at what the 2024 content was supposed to look like, that's why they bundled it with two books a lot of buyers already had for a year end sale spike). I would have figured there would have been some overlap like there was with MMM and Volos/Mord's but if the disappearance of piecemeal content is part of prepping the marketplace for the 2024 expression, maybe there won't be. You may not think the MMM from Volo/Mord's transition was right, but it's what they did. Moreover, I'd say it was better in that IIRC they did give the community some heads up. Had they announced they were pulling piecemeal content, that might have actually caused a boost in sales that my guess are flattening as potential new buyers are waiting for the 2024 books to drop. And given what happened, I think people are going to be gun-shy about buying _anything_ on DDB until the new books drop. The Marketplace has a shifting floor now.
I just wonder how much of a difference in the revision of the rules there is that the ability to construct the a-la-carte segments requires a complete shutdown this soon?
I don't think it's a technical matter so much as juking anticipated sales stats to give credit to the 2024 rules. Let's say piecemeal purchases return in the new books (big IF, but that's the only sane thing I see happening barring something else I float below in this response). Someone's been wanting to buy a Soul Knife, they can't now; but with the 2024 PHB dropping they can and the sale goes to 2024 stats making it sound more successful because they can slake all that hunger for piecemeal content with the new version. I think folks on this board forget how, at least it seems to me, the bulk of D&D players play and buy much more casually. Folks on this board are outraged, the larger player base is more than willing to buy the edition that will be supported on the horizon.
D&D is an RPG that works game wise more like Minecraft, than monopoly. A-la-carte was the mod packs of the D&D core, that could be added to the most basic rules to custom build not only players characters but the eventual expansion in a custom universe of ones own creation. Sure we can still do all those things, but now it’s 5 times harder, and expensive. Far too much of what this site offers can be discovered outside, but at least here most of it could be acquired for a reasonable price. But as being noted, that is no longer a service.
The other alternative for pulling piecemeal pieces is treating books after the core as the way many video games treat "season passes." There's new areas to play through and new player options, but you got to buy the whole package to use it, you can also play without it. It's no secret WotC has had a revolving door of video game industry people spin through its executive side, I could see this logic thinking it can "fix" the D&D monetization "problem". I think it's a mistake, and I think the roll out of the new marketplace demonstrates there's a management team over the marketplace that really didn't seem to understand what makes DDB successful and brings people to DDB instead of the major VTT competitors with currently superior VTTs, superior in that core features aren't still in Alpha or a teaser video with no progress publicly reported.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I just wonder how much of a difference in the revision of the rules there is that the ability to construct the a-la-carte segments requires a complete shutdown this soon?
I don't think it's a technical matter so much as juking anticipated sales stats to give credit to the 2024 rules. Let's say piecemeal purchases return in the new books (big IF, but that's the only sane thing I see happening barring something else I float below in this response). Someone's been wanting to buy a Soul Knife, they can't now; but with the 2024 PHB dropping they can and the sale goes to 2024 stats making it sound more successful because they can slake all that hunger for piecemeal content with the new version. I think folks on this board forget how, at least it seems to me, the bulk of D&D players play and buy much more casually. Folks on this board are outraged, the larger player base is more than willing to buy the edition that will be supported on the horizon.
D&D is an RPG that works game wise more like Minecraft, than monopoly. A-la-carte was the mod packs of the D&D core, that could be added to the most basic rules to custom build not only players characters but the eventual expansion in a custom universe of ones own creation. Sure we can still do all those things, but now it’s 5 times harder, and expensive. Far too much of what this site offers can be discovered outside, but at least here most of it could be acquired for a reasonable price. But as being noted, that is no longer a service.
The other alternative for pulling piecemeal pieces is treating books after the core as the way many video games treat "season passes." There's new areas to play through and new player options, but you got to buy the whole package to use it, you can also play without it. It's no secret WotC has had a revolving door of video game industry people spin through its executive side, I could see this logic thinking it can "fix" the D&D monetization "problem". I think it's a mistake, and I think the roll out of the new marketplace demonstrates there's a management team over the marketplace that really didn't seem to understand what makes DDB successful and brings people to DDB instead of the major VTT competitors with currently superior VTTs, superior in that core features aren't still in Alpha or a teaser video with no progress publicly reported.
Totally agree, an alpha VTT behind a sub was the straw for me. Now I understand to need testers to shake out bugs, and suggest features, but at least let everyone have a look at whats cooking, and maybe give hints.
Yea, I know bad comes with good as feedback goes, but at least give it a glance. If your gonna consider Ai, let it sort the good from the bad.
Or at the least offer the lower ranks access to a previous version of the VTT in progress, so as to get some utility from it.
I mean come on, not exactly thinking here are they.
Putting in my thoughts... I'm very disappointed in this decision to remove a la carte purchases. I tend to purchase hardcover books and buy digital pieces for my players. I will not be spending twice the money for my players' convenience and I will not just buy digital books I cannot own and keep. So, in my case, sales will be lost.
I understand that mixing player info and GM info into the same book creates more sales because GMs buy most of the books and there are fewer GMs than players. Thus, the company needs lures for player purchases. I also understand that offering a la carte purchases allowed a separation of that mix -- which is probably a big reason they got the ax. However, I would really appreciate less-mixed books and more GM support. Please give back the a la carte purchase ability.
There's also a need in eCommerce/content sales platforms that has to convey a level of stability. If I buy content from you, and I have spent over $200 buying piecemeal over just the last few months (and was planning to buy more because I like the convenience of a digital environment), it makes me very hesitant to continue my purchases because I intuit that policy is fully committed to turning off services/content I've paid for -- without recourse.
As at now, like many others, I can't consider buying anything because I don't know what will happen to it if it somehow fails to work commercially. TBH, while your commercials have to work, it's not a problem you can foist on customers.
Again, not making this personal, but the take away, should be that fostering online services necessitates taking on the role of being reliable and trustworthy. An simple analogy: You wouldn't sign up for any online service, and pay them, if you didn't have some sense they would exist shortly thereafter. You wouldn't even order a birthday cake from a brick and mortar if you didn't expect them to be there by the time the party rolled around. Drastically altering the terms of engagement, as legal as it may be, breaks trust.
I will also be adopting a wait and see for now, and will probably look around to see if there's decent replacement services/software. Even if this/these decisions on piecemeal are reversed I'm not sure I have the confidence to buy like before -- I have developed a very real concern that Hasbro/WoTC may change things on a whim (from my perspective) and the latest quarterly results.
But I think it's a fair point. When Independant creators are able to churn out well balanced subclasses, Feats, magic items, and even adventures with a high degree of regularity, why can't WOTC, with their *significantly* higher degree of resources do the same? Yes there are only so many books you can release before you cause fatigue. But they could provide much better content within the ones they have.
Are they really better than Wizards' stuff though? What about them makes it better than Wizards' content? I do not see this perceived quality increase that third party content has over official content. Granted I do not care much for third party content in general so I have not seen much, but I have not seen anything that amazed me either out of the stuff that I do see. If anything, I find more interesting things and get more inspirations outside of the TTRPG space than in it. The only two things that third party can potentially do better than Wizards is on price of content, and the organization of the content.
Another thing to consider is convenience and quality of life experience. Wizards and Paizo can provide everything you need to run a game smoothly and easily. As a GM, one of my most important tools are monster cards and Beyond's monster database. Paizo got a database and cards too, but I am not aware of any other game that has their own database of monsters or sell their own monster cards. Additionally, looking up rules is way easier with Beyond, and while Beyond's search does suck, with how popular D&D is, you will have an easier time looking things up on Google compared to another game. And as horribly monolingual Beyond is, Wizards as a whole is not, and you can share the joys of D&D with people who speak a different language than you with the physical books in different languages. It is going to be extremely difficult to communicate, but you can do hack-and-slash and dungeon crawling games and rely on the boardgame aspect of D&D.
And most uniquely, I do not know of any other TTRPG that lets you purchase piecemeal content at Beyond's level of granularity and scale. D&D and Beyond no longer has it either, hence this sad PSA thread, but it did have it at one point!
I think when you look at better and worse it's a bit of a subjective take on things. When you look at things like classes, subclasses, spells, Feats and the like... It is hard to quantify.
To clarify, I am explicitly talking about content compatible with 5e here.
What I will say is that in my opinion, there are far more creators out there who can produce reliable balanced content, at a significantly higher pace than WOTC can, with a relatively similar ratio of hits to misses. Just because it has the wizards of the coast stamp on it does not make it inherently better than a third party - it just means it got through their QA process.
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
And to be clear, I'm not naysaying the Dndbeyond tool - it's incredible. It's why I'm so invested (financially and emotionally :D)
What I am saying is that the quality of dndbeyond as a resource is entirely separate to the ability to produce content for it. If Wizards don't produce good quality books, with resources worth purchasing, then the tool starts to loose Its lustre.
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
Is your argument that because they've never got something right, they shouldn't bother even trying? Because these are design teams being paid actual money to work on this stuff.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
Is your argument that because they've never got something right, they shouldn't bother even trying? Because these are design teams being paid actual money to work on this stuff.
In a 50 year old, still very popular game? They clearly have gotten enough right to get this far.
Edit: And this is a luxury product. It is not like anyone will end up with malnutrition from any imbalances. Nor will their homes be too cold or too hot or the air or water somehow toxic. Perspective here. If you do not like the product, you are not obligated to buy it. Never have been.
I can't consider buying anything because I don't know what will happen to it if it somehow fails to work commercially.
I'm sorry, but... what are you talking about? Your existing purchases aren't going anywhere. DDB isn't going anywhere. D&D isn't going anywhere
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
Is your argument that because they've never got something right, they shouldn't bother even trying? Because these are design teams being paid actual money to work on this stuff.
In a 50 year old, still very popular game? They clearly have gotten enough right to get this far.
Edit: And this is a luxury product. It is not like anyone will end up with malnutrition from any imbalances. Nor will their homes be too cold or too hot or the air or water somehow toxic. Perspective here. If you do not like the product, you are not obligated to buy it. Never have been.
I mean, I do agree with what you're saying - it certainly isn't life or death here - but I don't think anyone's arguing that it is. I don't however agree that we can't critique a product, simply by merit of it being a luxury product.
And even then, I'm not complaining so much as pointing out they clearly don't feel passionately about a balanced system. It isn't the robust QA process that prevents them from releasing content for players to use - it's a lack of content that prevents that.
And even then, I'm not bemoaning the lack of content in and of itself - I'm Just saying - that if WOTC want players to buy more stuff (One of their core goals) then they should release books with enough content they will use to tempt them, and not some of the player-option-anaemic books they have, as of late.
Edit: I should clarify, I am a DM, and I own most of the books (Up until about the last year - bit light on the newest ones I have to admit). But if we look at a recent example - The Book of Many Things. $30 - and total player options? 2 backgrounds, 1 feat, 3 spells. What player would spend $30 for those? If they were a completionist and wanted the full book? sure. But that's a relatively small number of the player base. Add in a few more spells, feats and subclasses - and it actually starts looking like a tempting buy (See Tashas, Xanathars, etc).
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
Is your argument that because they've never got something right, they shouldn't bother even trying? Because these are design teams being paid actual money to work on this stuff.
In a 50 year old, still very popular game? They clearly have gotten enough right to get this far.
Edit: And this is a luxury product. It is not like anyone will end up with malnutrition from any imbalances. Nor will their homes be too cold or too hot or the air or water somehow toxic. Perspective here. If you do not like the product, you are not obligated to buy it. Never have been.
I mean, I do agree with what you're saying - it certainly isn't life or death here - but I don't think anyone's arguing that it is. I don't however agree that we can't critique a product, simply by merit of it being a luxury product.
And even then, I'm not complaining so much as pointing out they clearly don't feel passionately about a balanced system. It isn't the robust QA process that prevents them from releasing content for players to use - it's a lack of content that prevents that.
And even then, I'm not bemoaning the lack of content in and of itself - I'm Just saying - that if WOTC want players to buy more stuff (One of their core goals) then they should release books with enough content they will use to tempt them, and not some of the player-option-anaemic books they have, as of late.
Edit: I should clarify, I am a DM, and I own most of the books (Up until about the last year - bit light on the newest ones I have to admit). But if we look at a recent example - The Book of Many Things. $30 - and total player options? 2 backgrounds, 1 feat, 3 spells. What player would spend $30 for those? If they were a completionist and wanted the full book? sure. But that's a relatively small number of the player base. Add in a few more spells, feats and subclasses - and it actually starts looking like a tempting buy (See Tashas, Xanathars, etc).
I was really wondering about their logic with the Deck of Many Things book. The one item most experienced DM's learn to avoid at all costs and they want to write a whole rule book around it? WHY??? sigh...
And you are right about player options being far greater as selling points than other things, but then there are the 'More settings' folks who might be an influence there?
I was really wondering about their logic with the Deck of Many Things book. The one item most experienced DM's learn to avoid at all costs and they want to write a whole rule book around it? WHY??? sigh...
And you are right about player options being far greater as selling points than other things, but then there are the 'More settings' folks who might be an influence there?
And I admit, I'm a sucker for a good setting book too. I'm still itching for a Dark Sun book. I think WOTC would do well to understand the value of seeing what each side of their consumer base want - Some are after monsters, settings, lore, adventures - and others are after options, and mechanics. Its not perfectly split down the middle between DM's and Players there - but I suspect the demographics lean in that way.
To me, the A la carté stuff was the perfect solution to that - A book that holds almost no appeal to a player could still generate some revenue from a person, if there was a particular feat, background or spell that leapt out. I would even understand it more if they stopped the 'micro' buys, if the card transaction fees are really a big deal - and switched to mini-bundles for each book. Varying degrees of "Buy all the player options" or "buy all the Feats" as opposed to allowing people to buy specific spells.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Regardless of their reasons, I bought al la cart here instead of on roll20 because it was more convenient.
Now, I have already started switching fully over to roll20. I have beta tested for them and I know what's coming, and I believe it will be better. The Al la Cart kept me loyal through last year's debacle, but this? No way am I putting up with this.
Certainly not buying the new books except on roll20...where all of my adventures are as well. Not buying print books either.
Check us out on Twitch, YouTube and the DISCORD!
Disappointing.
It was great like steam bundles, now its not.
If I only had a little to spend, I could buy just the things I needed now, and then later buy the whole book without having 'wasted' any money or having to pay twice. And when there is only a few dollars left to get the rest of it, then why not,
Now, I might not buy anything at all because I might not have the money up front for all of it, and that expendable income might go to something else instead now.
Not to sidetrack even further, but another important distinction between the two: on DMs Guild you can only post content that uses approved official D&D settings (currently: Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Eberron, Ravnica, Theros, Arcavios (Strixhaven), and Spelljammer) or setting agnostic content (no homebrewed cities, towns, worlds, etc.).
Are they really better than Wizards' stuff though? What about them makes it better than Wizards' content? I do not see this perceived quality increase that third party content has over official content. Granted I do not care much for third party content in general so I have not seen much, but I have not seen anything that amazed me either out of the stuff that I do see. If anything, I find more interesting things and get more inspirations outside of the TTRPG space than in it. The only two things that third party can potentially do better than Wizards is on price of content, and the organization of the content.
Another thing to consider is convenience and quality of life experience. Wizards and Paizo can provide everything you need to run a game smoothly and easily. As a GM, one of my most important tools are monster cards and Beyond's monster database. Paizo got a database and cards too, but I am not aware of any other game that has their own database of monsters or sell their own monster cards. Additionally, looking up rules is way easier with Beyond, and while Beyond's search does suck, with how popular D&D is, you will have an easier time looking things up on Google compared to another game. And as horribly monolingual Beyond is, Wizards as a whole is not, and you can share the joys of D&D with people who speak a different language than you with the physical books in different languages. It is going to be extremely difficult to communicate, but you can do hack-and-slash and dungeon crawling games and rely on the boardgame aspect of D&D.
And most uniquely, I do not know of any other TTRPG that lets you purchase piecemeal content at Beyond's level of granularity and scale. D&D and Beyond no longer has it either, hence this sad PSA thread, but it did have it at one point!
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Was the idea that OneDnD is Backwards Compatible with 5e scrapped?
If not, I don't see what the harm in the legacy piecemeal content still existing is.
(Honestly I didn't think they were in the right for making the Volo's versions of old races unbuyable either.)
I just wonder how much of a difference in the revision of the rules there is that the ability to construct the a-la-carte segments requires a complete shutdown this soon?
I could understand if a complete overhaul of the core database code, it’s reaching the 10yr milestone and probably looks like a hoarder storage shed, is required but this isn’t how to handle it.
This however, reeks of corporate stupidity, employees are only following orders frantically signing it’s bad while having to give their official response.
If some corporate a-hole doesn’t get their yearly $500,000 bonus because of stupid decisions of late, well then cry me a river and see if I give a $h!t.
( this is again, pointing out the elephant in the room, not meant to inflame. )
D&D is an RPG that works game wise more like Minecraft, than monopoly. A-la-carte was the mod packs of the D&D core, that could be added to the most basic rules to custom build not only players characters but the eventual expansion in a custom universe of ones own creation.
Sure we can still do all those things, but now it’s 5 times harder, and expensive. Far too much of what this site offers can be discovered outside, but at least here most of it could be acquired for a reasonable price. But as being noted, that is no longer a service.
If corporate wants to complain about being under- monetized, this is sure as hell not the way to do it.
I could be utterly descriptive of what I think of the corporate leadership of WotC & Hasbro, but I will let you imagine the words and displeasure one feels when one has been blatantly bent over.
You're answering your own question there. The 2024 D&D will be compatible with 2014 content, but MMM superseding Volo's and Mord's and the content of those older books becoming available only through Legacy access is exactly how I expect 2024 to roll out (everyone forgets MMM was a peak at what the 2024 content was supposed to look like, that's why they bundled it with two books a lot of buyers already had for a year end sale spike). I would have figured there would have been some overlap like there was with MMM and Volos/Mord's but if the disappearance of piecemeal content is part of prepping the marketplace for the 2024 expression, maybe there won't be. You may not think the MMM from Volo/Mord's transition was right, but it's what they did. Moreover, I'd say it was better in that IIRC they did give the community some heads up. Had they announced they were pulling piecemeal content, that might have actually caused a boost in sales that my guess are flattening as potential new buyers are waiting for the 2024 books to drop. And given what happened, I think people are going to be gun-shy about buying _anything_ on DDB until the new books drop. The Marketplace has a shifting floor now.
I don't think it's a technical matter so much as juking anticipated sales stats to give credit to the 2024 rules. Let's say piecemeal purchases return in the new books (big IF, but that's the only sane thing I see happening barring something else I float below in this response). Someone's been wanting to buy a Soul Knife, they can't now; but with the 2024 PHB dropping they can and the sale goes to 2024 stats making it sound more successful because they can slake all that hunger for piecemeal content with the new version. I think folks on this board forget how, at least it seems to me, the bulk of D&D players play and buy much more casually. Folks on this board are outraged, the larger player base is more than willing to buy the edition that will be supported on the horizon.
The other alternative for pulling piecemeal pieces is treating books after the core as the way many video games treat "season passes." There's new areas to play through and new player options, but you got to buy the whole package to use it, you can also play without it. It's no secret WotC has had a revolving door of video game industry people spin through its executive side, I could see this logic thinking it can "fix" the D&D monetization "problem". I think it's a mistake, and I think the roll out of the new marketplace demonstrates there's a management team over the marketplace that really didn't seem to understand what makes DDB successful and brings people to DDB instead of the major VTT competitors with currently superior VTTs, superior in that core features aren't still in Alpha or a teaser video with no progress publicly reported.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Totally agree, an alpha VTT behind a sub was the straw for me. Now I understand to need testers to shake out bugs, and suggest features, but at least let everyone have a look at whats cooking, and maybe give hints.
Yea, I know bad comes with good as feedback goes, but at least give it a glance. If your gonna consider Ai, let it sort the good from the bad.
Or at the least offer the lower ranks access to a previous version of the VTT in progress, so as to get some utility from it.
I mean come on, not exactly thinking here are they.
Putting in my thoughts... I'm very disappointed in this decision to remove a la carte purchases. I tend to purchase hardcover books and buy digital pieces for my players. I will not be spending twice the money for my players' convenience and I will not just buy digital books I cannot own and keep. So, in my case, sales will be lost.
I understand that mixing player info and GM info into the same book creates more sales because GMs buy most of the books and there are fewer GMs than players. Thus, the company needs lures for player purchases. I also understand that offering a la carte purchases allowed a separation of that mix -- which is probably a big reason they got the ax. However, I would really appreciate less-mixed books and more GM support. Please give back the a la carte purchase ability.
Repost below...
Just to follow on Linkite's post:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/196284-psa-the-marketplace-got-rid-of-individual?comment=128
There's also a need in eCommerce/content sales platforms that has to convey a level of stability. If I buy content from you, and I have spent over $200 buying piecemeal over just the last few months (and was planning to buy more because I like the convenience of a digital environment), it makes me very hesitant to continue my purchases because I intuit that policy is fully committed to turning off services/content I've paid for -- without recourse.
As at now, like many others, I can't consider buying anything because I don't know what will happen to it if it somehow fails to work commercially. TBH, while your commercials have to work, it's not a problem you can foist on customers.
Again, not making this personal, but the take away, should be that fostering online services necessitates taking on the role of being reliable and trustworthy. An simple analogy: You wouldn't sign up for any online service, and pay them, if you didn't have some sense they would exist shortly thereafter. You wouldn't even order a birthday cake from a brick and mortar if you didn't expect them to be there by the time the party rolled around. Drastically altering the terms of engagement, as legal as it may be, breaks trust.
I will also be adopting a wait and see for now, and will probably look around to see if there's decent replacement services/software. Even if this/these decisions on piecemeal are reversed I'm not sure I have the confidence to buy like before -- I have developed a very real concern that Hasbro/WoTC may change things on a whim (from my perspective) and the latest quarterly results.
WotC is ruining dnd beyond, greedy pigs. Nothing improves, it gets worse actually, and they ask for more. Time to use something else I guess.
I think when you look at better and worse it's a bit of a subjective take on things. When you look at things like classes, subclasses, spells, Feats and the like... It is hard to quantify.
To clarify, I am explicitly talking about content compatible with 5e here.
What I will say is that in my opinion, there are far more creators out there who can produce reliable balanced content, at a significantly higher pace than WOTC can, with a relatively similar ratio of hits to misses. Just because it has the wizards of the coast stamp on it does not make it inherently better than a third party - it just means it got through their QA process.
I think the martial/caster divide sums up the effectiveness of that QA process, but I digress.
And to be clear, I'm not naysaying the Dndbeyond tool - it's incredible. It's why I'm so invested (financially and emotionally :D)
What I am saying is that the quality of dndbeyond as a resource is entirely separate to the ability to produce content for it. If Wizards don't produce good quality books, with resources worth purchasing, then the tool starts to loose Its lustre.
When in the entire history of the game, going right back to 0e, has this been any different? Casters used to be squishier at level 1 sure, and there were no cantrips yet, but once they got established, it was the same thing.
Is your argument that because they've never got something right, they shouldn't bother even trying? Because these are design teams being paid actual money to work on this stuff.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
In a 50 year old, still very popular game? They clearly have gotten enough right to get this far.
Edit: And this is a luxury product. It is not like anyone will end up with malnutrition from any imbalances. Nor will their homes be too cold or too hot or the air or water somehow toxic. Perspective here. If you do not like the product, you are not obligated to buy it. Never have been.
I'm sorry, but... what are you talking about? Your existing purchases aren't going anywhere. DDB isn't going anywhere. D&D isn't going anywhere
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I mean, I do agree with what you're saying - it certainly isn't life or death here - but I don't think anyone's arguing that it is. I don't however agree that we can't critique a product, simply by merit of it being a luxury product.
And even then, I'm not complaining so much as pointing out they clearly don't feel passionately about a balanced system. It isn't the robust QA process that prevents them from releasing content for players to use - it's a lack of content that prevents that.
And even then, I'm not bemoaning the lack of content in and of itself - I'm Just saying - that if WOTC want players to buy more stuff (One of their core goals) then they should release books with enough content they will use to tempt them, and not some of the player-option-anaemic books they have, as of late.
Edit: I should clarify, I am a DM, and I own most of the books (Up until about the last year - bit light on the newest ones I have to admit).
But if we look at a recent example - The Book of Many Things. $30 - and total player options? 2 backgrounds, 1 feat, 3 spells. What player would spend $30 for those? If they were a completionist and wanted the full book? sure. But that's a relatively small number of the player base.
Add in a few more spells, feats and subclasses - and it actually starts looking like a tempting buy (See Tashas, Xanathars, etc).
I was really wondering about their logic with the Deck of Many Things book. The one item most experienced DM's learn to avoid at all costs and they want to write a whole rule book around it? WHY??? sigh...
And you are right about player options being far greater as selling points than other things, but then there are the 'More settings' folks who might be an influence there?
And I admit, I'm a sucker for a good setting book too. I'm still itching for a Dark Sun book. I think WOTC would do well to understand the value of seeing what each side of their consumer base want - Some are after monsters, settings, lore, adventures - and others are after options, and mechanics. Its not perfectly split down the middle between DM's and Players there - but I suspect the demographics lean in that way.
To me, the A la carté stuff was the perfect solution to that - A book that holds almost no appeal to a player could still generate some revenue from a person, if there was a particular feat, background or spell that leapt out. I would even understand it more if they stopped the 'micro' buys, if the card transaction fees are really a big deal - and switched to mini-bundles for each book. Varying degrees of "Buy all the player options" or "buy all the Feats" as opposed to allowing people to buy specific spells.