Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Sorry, but what "reasoned criticism and analysis" about WotC wasn't revealed in this forum that it had already been revealed in other forums?
I don't have a good solution for WoTC.
It's understood that they need to make money somehow, but everything is going to upset people.
It doesn't help that EVERYONE is getting subscription fatigue. I can just imagine the groan at my table if I ask my players to SUBSCRIBE to another thing.
The problem with drops is that the player perks have questionable value at best.
It's not the same as a video game cosmetic. The drops are only as valuable as your DM is good enough to describe.
It's hard to monetize a game that, at the end of the day, is just pretending with math.
I subscribe for the Quality of Life things.
I have never sold a friend on something quicker than when I was able to show how much of an improvement the paid version of something is over a free version.
For instance, if D&D beyond added some extremely nice note taking capability to the character sheets available only to paid members, many of my players would snap it up.
I... I'm confused. I pay for the master subscription, I share all my content in my campaign with my players, my players can use all my content with just a free subscription and they don't have to buy anything.
He means if D&D Beyond added something *really* important that could only be used if you subscribed, not that he's telling his players to subscribe now
I'm truly at a loss.
My original point was an observation of a recurring pattern on this platform (and many others), not an accusation of bad faith toward any individual. And further, when I mentioned "noise and histrionics," it was a description of the general atmosphere from every side, not a personal jab at you or any one individual. If that wasn't clear, I apologize.
On the other hand, you've interpret my observation of a pattern as a motive-assignment, while simultaneously arguing that those who disagree with you are motivated by a desire to control your playstyle. That is precisely the kind of attributing motives I'm trying to step away from.
I have made a deliberate and concerted effort to address arguments charitably and avoid sarcasm in this thread. However, since your responses have consistently ignored the substantive arguments I've laid out, and instead focused on perceived intent and personal snipes, I won't be replying to you further in this thread. I'm happy to discuss actual issues with others.
My point isn't about what has been said here, but where the most prominent critical voices choose to speak.
Consider the new D&D Community Advisory Group. Members like Teos Abadía and Mike Shea have frequently balanced working with WotC while acting as harsh critics. Noticeably, neither they nor most other heavy-hitters in the TTRPG space maintain an active presence on these specific forums.
One reason is likely structural: independent platforms allow them to publish analysis without needing corporate consent or fearing arbitrary rule changes. While there is certainly valid discussion here, the fact that the advisory group and key community leaders gravitate toward spaces like ENWorld or their own channels suggests they find those environments more conducive to genuine, unfiltered dialogue. Indeed, I haven't seen much evidence that WotC themselves pay more attention to these forums than any other platform.
To be clear, this is not a statement about any of you.
Your point is that criticism of the WtoC is underrepresented here, but that's not what you're responding to here. It doesn't matter if the primary sources making these criticisms aren't present in this forum, what matters is if these criticisms ARE expressed here in this forum, and they are constantly being released here.
To say that these criticisms would only be present here if these people were present here is a Red Herring on the issue.
Oh please. Just because you come in here and dont name specific individuals, doesnt mean everything you say is in good faith.
Coming in here and saying with broad brush strokes that this is a community of entrenched biases that reflexively shout down criticism is not a good faith argument. It is the very definition of assuming bad faith about everyone here.
Saying "gnomes are lazy" and then defending it by saying "i didnt say anything bad about any individual gnome" is not the get out of jail free card you think it is.
Okay look, I simply don't care enough to continue bickering about this. My experience has been that relative to the number of critics elsewhere, the share is less on D&D Beyond. Yours is different. Can we, collectively, get back to discussing something relevant? I'm more than happy to surrender on this point so we don't waste another iota of thought on it.
For what it's worth, I'm still happy to discuss productive ways for WotC to engage with otherwise disaffected D&D fans.
The point of the thread is literally to talk about WotC navigating how to do their thing and deal with criticism. It is relevant because the fact that criticism is expressed, listened to, and taken seriously here on the DDB forums is proven by the fact that WotC and the DDB team are changing the drops based on that criticism. So as I expressed earlier, the idea that criticism is underrepresented here is ridiculous.
As for making money without making people mad... I dunno. The general vibes of the world right now kinda suggest that someone's always going to be mad about something. I think in general the best strategy for Wizards is to stay the course with trying new things and listening to feedback and being willing to make changes when things don't go well. I could list a few things that would be appealing specifically to me and would make me go all *Fry shaking a fistful of dollars and saying "shut up and take my money"* but I don't think appealing to an audience of one is going to be the profitable, crowd-pleasing play. Although if they really for reals are working on Dark Sun, I will happily buy that up in a heartbeat, and I based on vibes I'm getting here and elsewhere I think a lot of other people would very happily do the same. But there are going to be some folks getting absolutely hopping mad that some of the gross, toxic elements of vintage Dark Sun are going to be left behind. And you know what? They can stay mad. WotC can make bank on new Dark Sun content and they don't need to appease the crowd that wants to stay stuck in the problematic past.
Similarly, there's nothing they can do with the D&D Beyond platform that's going to make everyone happy. I like that they took a chance with Drops (I genuinely, thoroughly enjoy the spells). And even though I didn't have a problem with Drops requiring a subscription I think it's neato keen that they're listening to folks who didn't like that. I like the idea of being able to buy the Drops content down the road sounds good to me. Taking that a step further, I'd love to eventually buy physical versions of the current digital-only content.