Foundry posted a detailed response to the OGL 1.2 draft. A scathing exposure to how WotC is still lying about the original intent behind the OGLv1.0, and how WotC is trying to pave the way to limit all other VTTs.
Even if you only plan on using D&D Beyond's VTT and have no interest in foundry or any other VTT. I hope you can have empathy on how these OGL1.2 changes still massively affects these communities of fellow players. Or at the very least, think of how having competition in the VTT space will push D&D Beyond to make their VTT even better.
Of course it’s self serving. This OGL literally attacks them. They are defending themselves. Something can be self serving and correct in the same breath. It isn’t always but it can be.
Foundry is also a for profit company, with its own PR department. Why the assumption that everything they say is innocent and not the least bit self serving?
They are a for-profit company, but I take issue with the assertion that someone has to be "innocent" to be correct. The arguments they make stand on their own merits. But if you are to question their motivation, their goal is to maintain their market presence, that is the threat they are alluring to, and also the threat that their community is deeply concerned about. There is no threat to a DDB VTT (or anyone else) from FoundryVTT, outside of simply not being able to compete on fair terms. Nobody depends on Foundry to act in good faith to maintain their business. This is not the case for companies that depend on the OGL to build products and services for TTRPG fans. Wizards of the Coasts are also the instigators in this debacle, they are the ones attempting to change the status quo.
I would also point out that Foundry has a staff team of 11; 12 if you count the creator and owner. They have a PR person, more so than a department. I'm willing to bet that WotC's PR department is larger than all of Foundry. Wizards of the Coast has hundreds of employees, and is owned by a publicly traded company worth a billion dollars or more. At best you can make the case that neither entity are "innocent" but if you measure for-profit as the flag bearer for innocent, they are far more innocent then Wizards of the Coast.
Considering in their trailer for One DnD showed things that they say make the other VTT be like a video game with animated spells etc etc just kind of shows that once again WotC is continuing to show they are hypercritical. Not even if not a fan of VTT myself but I know a lot of people that like them. So I dont understand why they have such a hard on for VTT outside of they want a damn monopoly on it. Same thing with them buying out DnDBeyond itself.
They can be partially correct and WotC can still be going too far, but that does not mean Foundry has not been pushing this too far either.
And wealthy/greedy/for profit is what WotC are being accused of. I was just saying, if so, it applies to both sides.
And what I was really trying to get at is that the truth is somewhere between their two positions. Neither should be taken as gospel.
To me, it's about who's changing the status quo. If WotC was actively losing money on D&D, this could maybe be a very different conversation. But D&D is more popular than it's ever been, and WotC is raking in cash from D&D like never before. Even when the system and the quality of books have arguably been on the decline. Spelljammer, Witchlight, Fizbans, Strixheaven and even Tasha's have all come under criticism for what feels like rushed products. Then there's a matter that many of the latest releases have more or less been reprints (Monsters of the Multiverse, Tranny of Dragons).
Despite all of this, the status quo is that the Dungeons and Dragons brand has been making more money than ever before. To paint WotC as a victim in all of this mess is a level of absurdity. It's like they literally woke up one day and said, "D&D is doing great! Let's shake things up!" I'm not really that interested in listening to pity story for a company who has succeeded tremendously despite getting in their own way multiple times.
The OGL was always a good will gesture which adds certainty of what others can and can't use. Much in the SRD you can use even without a license since it's just raw mechanics. But nobody (not even WotC) truly knows where the line is at, that can only be decided in a court of law. The license removed the need to question it, it make it clear. In SRD: it's fine. Out of the SRD: it's off limits.
So on one side, you have a small indie companies like Foundry and independent publishers. Who simply want the certainty that an OGL provides, because you can't build a business in uncertain waters. On the other side, you have a successful business, who, not content with being at the peak of their success, want to change the status quo and revoke what was always intended to be a good will gesture to the community and destabilize the underpinnings of the hobby as a whole.
Sometimes the truth is in the middle, but sometimes someone is simply in the wrong. And it's really hard to see the middle ground with this one here.
It's really simple. There are tons of people who plays DnD because of Foundry and its module ecosystem. Attack Foundry at any level and we move to Pathfinder. Period.
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
Typically people do not access all their system resources through a singular VTT. Particularly if they are posting in the D&D Beyond Forums and have a join date of five years ago.
It's really simple. There are tons of people who plays DnD because of Foundry and its module ecosystem. Attack Foundry at any level and we move to Pathfinder. Period.
Then why haven't you moved already, if the differences are that marginal that any actions against Foundry would cause you to move?
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
Because the DnDBeyond and Foundry integration and experience is so damm good We don't want to lose It. Playind DnD character sheets in Foundry, fully animated, dynamic and fast, is the best RPG experience I have had in my 20 years in the hobby.
And If you read in reddit, we are THOUSANDS in the same situation. We love this game, and we NEED Foundry to make It work in the level we intend to.
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
They're not making money off of Foundry because of their own choices. I have purchased 4 copies of the PHB. One on Roll20, two physical, and a third on DDB. If they had offered one for Foundry, for the simplicity of including those options on Foundry without having to use cross platform converters, or entering the data myself. I would've purchased it a 5th time. Because $50 is worth 5-10 hours of my, and my player's time. Same goes with MM, DMG, XGtE, and TCoE. And I would also buy any adventures I would play on Foundry.
Foundry has approached WotC for years trying to them to license their content on Foundry, but according to Foundry (which to be fair may not be true, though I don't see any reasons for the to lie over this). WotC has basically not returned their emails, postponed meetings, and dragged their feet. The opportunity cost of WotC mishandling Foundry users are their own lost dollars. Somehow Paizo and many other content creators have been able to work out good and mutually beneficial deals with Foundry.
Also, with the SRD, the SRD is and hopefully always will be free. A VTT distribution of content that WotC distributes freely themselves already is not a lost product sell. What it is, however, is a lost opportunity to use their position as the market leader for TTRPGs, to give themselves an edge in the VTT market. Utilizing your market edge in one sector to give yourself a legup in another is classical monopoly behavior, and could even be illegal in some parts of the world.
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
They're not making money off of Foundry because of their own choices.
Foundry has approached WotC for years trying to them to license their content on Foundry, but according to Foundry (which to be fair may not be true, though I don't see any reasons for the to lie over this).
Even if it was because of their own choices, you are insisting they should be damned for eternity over them.
And Foundry's incentive for lying is pretty obvious. As long as people believe them, they are the poor picked on underdog. Facts be damned. Given the position they seem to be taking, that they can sell everything WotC produces, themselves, free, under the 1.0, why in blazes would they ever have contacted WotC regarding working out something worse for them than that? How do you get a better deal than 'free?'
I'm not insisting they be damned for eternity, only be damned while they make efforts worth of damnation. It is not too late for them to walk all of this back and once again be on good footing with their community. They are still actively choosing to push in this direction. Active choices are being made in this regard. Maybe they will listen to feedback, I certainly hope that they do.
Your suggestion that they're lying about WotC refusing to work with them is kind of bordering on the conspiratorial. Foundry has a huge opportunity lost for not working with WotC, as so many people won't switch if they have to manage importing all the content themselves. It's also the most requested thing across all of Foundry. Every time a Q&A stream is done people ask about 5e support (beyond the SRD). Most players and DMs won't commit to the long and painful process of importing content into Foundry. Which at times has you creating dozens or hundreds of spells, creatures or class features by hand, or paying for a content converter to import your DDB or Roll20 content into Foundry.
This partnership (or lack of) is hugely important for both Foundry and WotC. But perhaps we see now why they've refused to work with Foundry for the past 2 years or more. Now, not only are they not giving a pathway for people to purchase their content on Foundry. But by all attempts, trying stop people from using the content they share for free on Foundry.
And Foundry's incentive for lying is pretty obvious. As long as people believe them, they are the poor picked on underdog. Facts be damned. Given the position they seem to be taking, that they can sell everything WotC produces, themselves, free, under the 1.0, why in blazes would they ever have contacted WotC regarding working out something worse for them than that? How do you get a better deal than 'free?'
You're free to point out some lies if you spot them, but yelling that they have incentive to spin things isn't pointing out a lie.
But I'm pretty sure you're wrong on them 'selling everything WotC produces' Foundry only really comes with the SRD when it comes to 5e stuff, unless I've missed something massive.
I don't know what you mean by "Facts be Damned" here though. They are literally a much smaller company than Hasbro aren't they? Those are the facts damn them or not right?
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
They're not making money off of Foundry because of their own choices.
Foundry has approached WotC for years trying to them to license their content on Foundry, but according to Foundry (which to be fair may not be true, though I don't see any reasons for the to lie over this).
Even if it was because of their own choices, you are insisting they should be damned for eternity over them.
And Foundry's incentive for lying is pretty obvious. As long as people believe them, they are the poor picked on underdog. Facts be damned. Given the position they seem to be taking, that they can sell everything WotC produces, themselves, free, under the 1.0, why in blazes would they ever have contacted WotC regarding working out something worse for them than that? How do you get a better deal than 'free?'
Just for fun…
Let’s open a gaming store. Let’s provide tables and battle mats for our customers. Let’s photocopy some character sheets and game aids like initiative tracker.
Does Wizards of the Coast get a cut of our sweet sweet snack bar money? Is it our fault wizards refused to supply us with their books to sell for them?
Now Wizards wants to open a Walmart style gaming store. They want to say I can’t provide a good battle at, and we probably shouldn’t wash the tables regularly or they will sue. Plus, they will call the cops on us if we step out of line, but if they do, we should shut up and enjoy it.
Edit: Also, if WotC is not making any money off of Foundry now, which seems to be what Foundry are claiming on their website by way of their references to 1.0, how would you moving make any difference to the status quo for WotC?
They're not making money off of Foundry because of their own choices.
Foundry has approached WotC for years trying to them to license their content on Foundry, but according to Foundry (which to be fair may not be true, though I don't see any reasons for the to lie over this).
Even if it was because of their own choices, you are insisting they should be damned for eternity over them.
And Foundry's incentive for lying is pretty obvious. As long as people believe them, they are the poor picked on underdog. Facts be damned. Given the position they seem to be taking, that they can sell everything WotC produces, themselves, free, under the 1.0, why in blazes would they ever have contacted WotC regarding working out something worse for them than that? How do you get a better deal than 'free?'
Just for fun…
Let’s open a gaming store. Let’s provide tables and battle mats for our customers. Let’s photocopy some character sheets and game aids like initiative tracker.
Does Wizards of the Coast get a cut of our sweet sweet snack bar money? Is it our fault wizards refused to supply us with their books to sell for them?
Now Wizards wants to open a Walmart style gaming store. They want to say I can’t provide a good battle at, and we probably shouldn’t wash the tables regularly or they will sue. Plus, they will call the cops on us if we step out of line, but if they do, we should shut up and enjoy it.
Of course it’s self serving. This OGL literally attacks them. They are defending themselves. Something can be self serving and correct in the same breath. It isn’t always but it can be.
Having taken a look on the Foundry website, it seems to me pretty obvious why the OGL would attack them though. They seem to be advertising that they can provide everything in the 5e rules through the 1.0, i.e. without having to pay one cent to WotC. If true, that seems 100% in favour of Foundry at WotC's expense.
That's just patently false. Foundry only offers SRD content in their 5e system, everything else has to be input manually.
That being said, there are programs that can either read the rolls from DnD beyond, or import information from Beyond to save you doing it manually. I own the books physically, I bought them on roll20, then when I switched to Foundry I bought literally every book again on DnD Beyond for use in Foundry. Foundry literally leads to increased revenue for Beyond, specifically.
This is why so many people are pissed off with the VTT changes. They bought on Beyond specifically to use on VTT's like Foundry. My Legendary Bundle was purchased specifically because Foundry exists. Foundry got a one time payment of £40 out of me for the software, and Wizards got to sell literally every book, and Foundry received no commission on any of those sales - how is that not a good deal for Wizards?
Foundry is also a for profit company, with its own PR department. Why the assumption that everything they say is innocent and not the least bit self serving?
Foundry is a third party virtual tabletop provider, and the very exact target of the VTT policy that is effected. Because they are the most targeted and effected stakeholder over the matter, their bias and opinion is by far the most important to listen to and take heed of. Whether they are a for profit or free company doesn't change this fact.
It operates under the OGL, and as such only SRD content is contained within the 5e system. You can run a game on there without buying anything, but you won't have access to any content not contained within the SRD. If you remove the SRD, then they will likely just stop supporting 5e. They support dozens of other games - Pathfinder, Warhammer, Fate, Apocalypse Engine... you name it, Foundry probably has a system available, some selling officially licenced content. Dropping support for 5e isn't that big a deal for them as a company, they make ongoing revenue from partnered systems, 5e players only pay them once for the software and that's it. The only people who lose in that situation are Wizards, and the customers hoping to play DnD on Foundry.
As it currently stands, if you want other 5e content, you need to buy it somewhere else and either import it or transcribe it. I have used it for several years and I can assure you it does, in fact, work that way. This is part of the issue Wizards is having; they, and the people defending them, don't seem to actually understand what it is they're currently trying to clamp down on. Products and creators that, for years, have led to increased revenue for Wizards.
And I'm not complaining that I had to buy separately, what gave you that impression? I happily bought my books (they're on the shelf just behind me!), I happily bought on Roll20 so I could run modules for my friends (we had a blast!) and I happily bought my books again on DnD beyond (I get to use them in Fou-) oh, wait. Yeah it's that third purchase that might turn out to be a dissapointment.
It operates under the OGL, and as such only SRD content is contained within the 5e system. You can run a game on there without buying anything, but you won't have access to any content not contained within the SRD. If you remove the SRD, then they will likely just stop supporting 5e. They support dozens of other games - Pathfinder, Warhammer, Fate, Apocalypse Engine... you name it, Foundry probably has a system available, some selling officially licenced content. Dropping support for 5e isn't that big a deal for them as a company, they make ongoing revenue from partnered systems, 5e players only pay them once for the software and that's it. The only people who lose in that situation are Wizards, and the customers hoping to play DnD on Foundry.
As it currently stands, if you want other 5e content, you need to buy it somewhere else and either import it or transcribe it. I have used it for several years and I can assure you it does, in fact, work that way. This is part of the issue Wizards is having; they, and the people defending them, don't seem to actually understand what it is they're currently trying to clamp down on. Products and creators that, for years, have led to increased revenue for Wizards.
And I'm not complaining that I had to buy separately, what gave you that impression? I happily bought my books (they're on the shelf just behind me!), I happily bought on Roll20 so I could run modules for my friends (we had a blast!) and I happily bought my books again on DnD beyond (I get to use them in Fou-) oh, wait. Yeah it's that third purchase that might turn out to be a dissapointment.
The clamp down has to do with the term recurrent.
Wizards needs you to be exclusively on their platform. To be honest, I doubt they care about the smaller fish making adventures or supplements. All they want is for you to only be able to play the game through accessing their platform. This allows the live service fee and the ever popular micro transactions. This is what they have said out loud n
All of this was designed to make this very platform the only way to play. One D&D is more than the branding it is the whole market positioning. There is only one game and only one place to play it. The VTT thing is their main goal. The other stuff is there would be nice stuff.
But this is the frustrating thing. I've been giving recurring money to Beyond, NOT to Foundry.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate they've probably carried out a cost benefit analysis, and I can see how the math works in favour of this action.
Currently, lets say 5% of Beyond Subscribers play on Foundry. And 1% of those Subscribers are DM's, on the current highest tier ($6) to share content with their group.
For easy numbers, lets say there's a million overall subs. $60,000 a month
Now, lets say they bring out their own VTT. Lets say 5% of subscribers swap to Beyonds VTT. And now all VTT players now need a higher tier sub - lets say, $10 a month.
For a million overall subs, that's now $500,000 a month.
With their talk of under monetization, it's pretty obvious what the intent is. The only question is, whether players not currently on a VTT would be interested in trying one if it was available on site, and will the number of players currently using other VTT's swap to theirs. If they lose most of the 60k a month currently available, and lose the associated repeat purchases of standalone products, will they offset the amount they possibly gain by shutting down the competition?
Probably not. This probably makes economic sense to them, long term, assuming it doesn't literally burn the brand to the ground. Hence trying to placate us all in the interim. It's just so annoying knowing that they've pulled the rug out from so many other people, and seeing fans on this board try and paint Wizards as the victims here, or that they're doing it to "protect the marginalised" - like, you're playing directly into their hands.
Now, the moral thing to do, if they still want to make potentially as much money without ruining their reputation in the process, is build the best damn VTT that has ever existed and let the product speak for itself. Then you still get the upper end of the figures quoted, and you've earned it, not tried to litigate your way to it.
I found this bit of the Foundry statement interesting
Thou shalt not animate
The perplexing focus on animation of spell effects is an absurd heuristic as the primary example of what makes a virtual tabletop different from a video game. If differentiating between a VTT and a video game is essential (we contend it is not), there are far more cogent classifiers to use. Are the actions of both player and non-player characters controlled by a human? Does the game experience provide a framework for collaborative storytelling? Can the gamemaster invent new rules on the fly? Surely virtual tabletops and video games alike may both have animation present in the way they communicate information visually to users.
Even if a focus on "animation" is removed, it is concerning that Wizards of the Coast would choose which software features are appropriate for a virtual tabletop to implement and which are not.
They make good arguments about other ways to distinguish a VTT from a video game.
It got me to thinking. I'm wondering if WotC's plan to monetize its VTT is in part to charge players to add visual effects to their actions? Something similar to purchasing content on DDB. You want to see your fireball explode? $1.99 please.
So I'm gonna surprise all the people who think I'm a corporate apologist or a secret Wizards shill by saying I actually think the Foundry post had a lot of good points worth considering. It also brought them up CORRECTLY - in a calm and rational manner discussing arguments over the specific wording and what it means in the 1.2 document. There's a lot of value to be had in reading that post and using it as a springboard for one's own feedback, or even discussing it sensibly here in the forums. Not that anyone is being sensible about any of this shit, but man it'd be nice, wouldn't it?
Nevertheless. Foundry makes a lot of good points, but also yes - remember that they're a for-profit business trying to scoop the maximum amount of profitable space out of the new document. By all means, pay close attention to their feedback, a lot of it's really good! But just like how Paizo is not paying for their ORC out of the kindness of their hearts, Foundry has a vested interest in seeing Wizards' own business flounder and fail. Just something to keep in mind when taking in information. Honestly, that goes as a general Rule For Life - whatever news you're reading, remember that somebody's paying to put it in front of you and they're doing it for a reason.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Foundry posted a detailed response to the OGL 1.2 draft. A scathing exposure to how WotC is still lying about the original intent behind the OGLv1.0, and how WotC is trying to pave the way to limit all other VTTs.
Here's a link to the post: https://foundryvtt.com/article/ogl12-response-feedback/
Even if you only plan on using D&D Beyond's VTT and have no interest in foundry or any other VTT. I hope you can have empathy on how these OGL1.2 changes still massively affects these communities of fellow players. Or at the very least, think of how having competition in the VTT space will push D&D Beyond to make their VTT even better.
Of course it’s self serving. This OGL literally attacks them. They are defending themselves. Something can be self serving and correct in the same breath. It isn’t always but it can be.
They are a for-profit company, but I take issue with the assertion that someone has to be "innocent" to be correct. The arguments they make stand on their own merits. But if you are to question their motivation, their goal is to maintain their market presence, that is the threat they are alluring to, and also the threat that their community is deeply concerned about. There is no threat to a DDB VTT (or anyone else) from FoundryVTT, outside of simply not being able to compete on fair terms. Nobody depends on Foundry to act in good faith to maintain their business. This is not the case for companies that depend on the OGL to build products and services for TTRPG fans. Wizards of the Coasts are also the instigators in this debacle, they are the ones attempting to change the status quo.
I would also point out that Foundry has a staff team of 11; 12 if you count the creator and owner. They have a PR person, more so than a department. I'm willing to bet that WotC's PR department is larger than all of Foundry. Wizards of the Coast has hundreds of employees, and is owned by a publicly traded company worth a billion dollars or more. At best you can make the case that neither entity are "innocent" but if you measure for-profit as the flag bearer for innocent, they are far more innocent then Wizards of the Coast.
Considering in their trailer for One DnD showed things that they say make the other VTT be like a video game with animated spells etc etc just kind of shows that once again WotC is continuing to show they are hypercritical. Not even if not a fan of VTT myself but I know a lot of people that like them. So I dont understand why they have such a hard on for VTT outside of they want a damn monopoly on it. Same thing with them buying out DnDBeyond itself.
To me, it's about who's changing the status quo. If WotC was actively losing money on D&D, this could maybe be a very different conversation. But D&D is more popular than it's ever been, and WotC is raking in cash from D&D like never before. Even when the system and the quality of books have arguably been on the decline. Spelljammer, Witchlight, Fizbans, Strixheaven and even Tasha's have all come under criticism for what feels like rushed products. Then there's a matter that many of the latest releases have more or less been reprints (Monsters of the Multiverse, Tranny of Dragons).
Despite all of this, the status quo is that the Dungeons and Dragons brand has been making more money than ever before. To paint WotC as a victim in all of this mess is a level of absurdity. It's like they literally woke up one day and said, "D&D is doing great! Let's shake things up!" I'm not really that interested in listening to pity story for a company who has succeeded tremendously despite getting in their own way multiple times.
The OGL was always a good will gesture which adds certainty of what others can and can't use. Much in the SRD you can use even without a license since it's just raw mechanics. But nobody (not even WotC) truly knows where the line is at, that can only be decided in a court of law. The license removed the need to question it, it make it clear. In SRD: it's fine. Out of the SRD: it's off limits.
So on one side, you have a small indie companies like Foundry and independent publishers. Who simply want the certainty that an OGL provides, because you can't build a business in uncertain waters. On the other side, you have a successful business, who, not content with being at the peak of their success, want to change the status quo and revoke what was always intended to be a good will gesture to the community and destabilize the underpinnings of the hobby as a whole.
Sometimes the truth is in the middle, but sometimes someone is simply in the wrong. And it's really hard to see the middle ground with this one here.
It's really simple. There are tons of people who plays DnD because of Foundry and its module ecosystem. Attack Foundry at any level and we move to Pathfinder. Period.
Typically people do not access all their system resources through a singular VTT. Particularly if they are posting in the D&D Beyond Forums and have a join date of five years ago.
Because the DnDBeyond and Foundry integration and experience is so damm good We don't want to lose It. Playind DnD character sheets in Foundry, fully animated, dynamic and fast, is the best RPG experience I have had in my 20 years in the hobby.
And If you read in reddit, we are THOUSANDS in the same situation. We love this game, and we NEED Foundry to make It work in the level we intend to.
They're not making money off of Foundry because of their own choices. I have purchased 4 copies of the PHB. One on Roll20, two physical, and a third on DDB. If they had offered one for Foundry, for the simplicity of including those options on Foundry without having to use cross platform converters, or entering the data myself. I would've purchased it a 5th time. Because $50 is worth 5-10 hours of my, and my player's time. Same goes with MM, DMG, XGtE, and TCoE. And I would also buy any adventures I would play on Foundry.
Foundry has approached WotC for years trying to them to license their content on Foundry, but according to Foundry (which to be fair may not be true, though I don't see any reasons for the to lie over this). WotC has basically not returned their emails, postponed meetings, and dragged their feet. The opportunity cost of WotC mishandling Foundry users are their own lost dollars. Somehow Paizo and many other content creators have been able to work out good and mutually beneficial deals with Foundry.
Also, with the SRD, the SRD is and hopefully always will be free. A VTT distribution of content that WotC distributes freely themselves already is not a lost product sell. What it is, however, is a lost opportunity to use their position as the market leader for TTRPGs, to give themselves an edge in the VTT market. Utilizing your market edge in one sector to give yourself a legup in another is classical monopoly behavior, and could even be illegal in some parts of the world.
I'm not insisting they be damned for eternity, only be damned while they make efforts worth of damnation. It is not too late for them to walk all of this back and once again be on good footing with their community. They are still actively choosing to push in this direction. Active choices are being made in this regard. Maybe they will listen to feedback, I certainly hope that they do.
Your suggestion that they're lying about WotC refusing to work with them is kind of bordering on the conspiratorial. Foundry has a huge opportunity lost for not working with WotC, as so many people won't switch if they have to manage importing all the content themselves. It's also the most requested thing across all of Foundry. Every time a Q&A stream is done people ask about 5e support (beyond the SRD). Most players and DMs won't commit to the long and painful process of importing content into Foundry. Which at times has you creating dozens or hundreds of spells, creatures or class features by hand, or paying for a content converter to import your DDB or Roll20 content into Foundry.
This partnership (or lack of) is hugely important for both Foundry and WotC. But perhaps we see now why they've refused to work with Foundry for the past 2 years or more. Now, not only are they not giving a pathway for people to purchase their content on Foundry. But by all attempts, trying stop people from using the content they share for free on Foundry.
You're free to point out some lies if you spot them, but yelling that they have incentive to spin things isn't pointing out a lie.
But I'm pretty sure you're wrong on them 'selling everything WotC produces' Foundry only really comes with the SRD when it comes to 5e stuff, unless I've missed something massive.
I don't know what you mean by "Facts be Damned" here though. They are literally a much smaller company than Hasbro aren't they? Those are the facts damn them or not right?
Just for fun…
Let’s open a gaming store. Let’s provide tables and battle mats for our customers. Let’s photocopy some character sheets and game aids like initiative tracker.
Does Wizards of the Coast get a cut of our sweet sweet snack bar money? Is it our fault wizards refused to supply us with their books to sell for them?
Now Wizards wants to open a Walmart style gaming store. They want to say I can’t provide a good battle at, and we probably shouldn’t wash the tables regularly or they will sue. Plus, they will call the cops on us if we step out of line, but if they do, we should shut up and enjoy it.
This is what they are doing to the digital space.
Great and acurate description.
That's just patently false. Foundry only offers SRD content in their 5e system, everything else has to be input manually.
That being said, there are programs that can either read the rolls from DnD beyond, or import information from Beyond to save you doing it manually. I own the books physically, I bought them on roll20, then when I switched to Foundry I bought literally every book again on DnD Beyond for use in Foundry. Foundry literally leads to increased revenue for Beyond, specifically.
This is why so many people are pissed off with the VTT changes. They bought on Beyond specifically to use on VTT's like Foundry. My Legendary Bundle was purchased specifically because Foundry exists. Foundry got a one time payment of £40 out of me for the software, and Wizards got to sell literally every book, and Foundry received no commission on any of those sales - how is that not a good deal for Wizards?
Foundry is a third party virtual tabletop provider, and the very exact target of the VTT policy that is effected. Because they are the most targeted and effected stakeholder over the matter, their bias and opinion is by far the most important to listen to and take heed of. Whether they are a for profit or free company doesn't change this fact.
It operates under the OGL, and as such only SRD content is contained within the 5e system. You can run a game on there without buying anything, but you won't have access to any content not contained within the SRD. If you remove the SRD, then they will likely just stop supporting 5e. They support dozens of other games - Pathfinder, Warhammer, Fate, Apocalypse Engine... you name it, Foundry probably has a system available, some selling officially licenced content. Dropping support for 5e isn't that big a deal for them as a company, they make ongoing revenue from partnered systems, 5e players only pay them once for the software and that's it. The only people who lose in that situation are Wizards, and the customers hoping to play DnD on Foundry.
As it currently stands, if you want other 5e content, you need to buy it somewhere else and either import it or transcribe it. I have used it for several years and I can assure you it does, in fact, work that way. This is part of the issue Wizards is having; they, and the people defending them, don't seem to actually understand what it is they're currently trying to clamp down on. Products and creators that, for years, have led to increased revenue for Wizards.
And I'm not complaining that I had to buy separately, what gave you that impression? I happily bought my books (they're on the shelf just behind me!), I happily bought on Roll20 so I could run modules for my friends (we had a blast!) and I happily bought my books again on DnD beyond (I get to use them in Fou-) oh, wait. Yeah it's that third purchase that might turn out to be a dissapointment.
The clamp down has to do with the term recurrent.
Wizards needs you to be exclusively on their platform. To be honest, I doubt they care about the smaller fish making adventures or supplements. All they want is for you to only be able to play the game through accessing their platform. This allows the live service fee and the ever popular micro transactions. This is what they have said out loud n
All of this was designed to make this very platform the only way to play. One D&D is more than the branding it is the whole market positioning. There is only one game and only one place to play it. The VTT thing is their main goal. The other stuff is there would be nice stuff.
But this is the frustrating thing. I've been giving recurring money to Beyond, NOT to Foundry.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate they've probably carried out a cost benefit analysis, and I can see how the math works in favour of this action.
Currently, lets say 5% of Beyond Subscribers play on Foundry. And 1% of those Subscribers are DM's, on the current highest tier ($6) to share content with their group.
For easy numbers, lets say there's a million overall subs. $60,000 a month
Now, lets say they bring out their own VTT. Lets say 5% of subscribers swap to Beyonds VTT. And now all VTT players now need a higher tier sub - lets say, $10 a month.
For a million overall subs, that's now $500,000 a month.
With their talk of under monetization, it's pretty obvious what the intent is. The only question is, whether players not currently on a VTT would be interested in trying one if it was available on site, and will the number of players currently using other VTT's swap to theirs. If they lose most of the 60k a month currently available, and lose the associated repeat purchases of standalone products, will they offset the amount they possibly gain by shutting down the competition?
Probably not. This probably makes economic sense to them, long term, assuming it doesn't literally burn the brand to the ground. Hence trying to placate us all in the interim. It's just so annoying knowing that they've pulled the rug out from so many other people, and seeing fans on this board try and paint Wizards as the victims here, or that they're doing it to "protect the marginalised" - like, you're playing directly into their hands.
Now, the moral thing to do, if they still want to make potentially as much money without ruining their reputation in the process, is build the best damn VTT that has ever existed and let the product speak for itself. Then you still get the upper end of the figures quoted, and you've earned it, not tried to litigate your way to it.
I found this bit of the Foundry statement interesting
They make good arguments about other ways to distinguish a VTT from a video game.
It got me to thinking. I'm wondering if WotC's plan to monetize its VTT is in part to charge players to add visual effects to their actions? Something similar to purchasing content on DDB. You want to see your fireball explode? $1.99 please.
So I'm gonna surprise all the people who think I'm a corporate apologist or a secret Wizards shill by saying I actually think the Foundry post had a lot of good points worth considering. It also brought them up CORRECTLY - in a calm and rational manner discussing arguments over the specific wording and what it means in the 1.2 document. There's a lot of value to be had in reading that post and using it as a springboard for one's own feedback, or even discussing it sensibly here in the forums. Not that anyone is being sensible about any of this shit, but man it'd be nice, wouldn't it?
Nevertheless. Foundry makes a lot of good points, but also yes - remember that they're a for-profit business trying to scoop the maximum amount of profitable space out of the new document. By all means, pay close attention to their feedback, a lot of it's really good! But just like how Paizo is not paying for their ORC out of the kindness of their hearts, Foundry has a vested interest in seeing Wizards' own business flounder and fail. Just something to keep in mind when taking in information. Honestly, that goes as a general Rule For Life - whatever news you're reading, remember that somebody's paying to put it in front of you and they're doing it for a reason.
Please do not contact or message me.