One reason this forum sees little genuine engagement is that it attracts a community with entrenched biases against those who question the game's direction. Good-faith discourse is rare here, in part because dissenters, particularly those critical of WotC, are underrepresented.
I believe WotC has made both sound and questionable decisions for consumers. Their most significant positive move was releasing the 5e SRD under a creative commons license, which fostered openness and innovation.
However, I view the "Drops" initiative as a step backward for consumers. It represents a foothold for digital-only content that cannot truly be owned. Historically, nearly all 5e material was accompanied by a physical book, ensuring access even if D&D Beyond disappeared. While I personally prefer pdfs over bulky physical collections, which are cumbersome to store, transport, and vulnerable to damage, the principle of ownership remains important to me.
This concern stems from my experience when 4e ended and D&D Insider was discontinued. Despite paying for a subscription, I lost access to all the rules and resources I relied on. There is no guarantee that D&D Beyond won't face a similar fate, leaving players with nothing.
This is pretty much where I'm at.
I'm not going to pretend that I've been a strident supporter of WotC; I've been critical of them and their stewardship of the IP because I care about it and when things are changed for broad market appeal I do indeed rankle because I feel that the flavor and style and such is being diluted. The issue, is that when I've made my concerns known... people come out of the woodwork to insist that I'm a racist or an adherent of Austrian painter or how "the evil gene doesn't exist!!!!" despite me acknowledging that there are parts of Gary's vision that absolutely belong in the dustbin of history.
To bring this back around to the topic at hand, there are times when I and others have pointed out the frustration we have with Beyond as a part of WotC's business; I personally feel that the electronic materials should be available to people who purchased the physical copies of the various modules and/or player materials at no additional cost (I have a small bookshelf full of materials that I would want to access for D&D beyond and VTTs)... but when I make this fair suggestion I instead get to hear about how this is somehow unfair or such while Beyond and WotC try to find some new and exciting way to extract money from my pocket.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is pretty much where I'm at.
I'm not going to pretend that I've been a strident supporter of WotC; I've been critical of them and their stewardship of the IP because I care about it and when things are changed for broad market appeal I do indeed rankle because I feel that the flavor and style and such is being diluted. The issue, is that when I've made my concerns known... people come out of the woodwork to insist that I'm a racist or an adherent of Austrian painter or how "the evil gene doesn't exist!!!!" despite me acknowledging that there are parts of Gary's vision that absolutely belong in the dustbin of history.
To bring this back around to the topic at hand, there are times when I and others have pointed out the frustration we have with Beyond as a part of WotC's business; I personally feel that the electronic materials should be available to people who purchased the physical copies of the various modules and/or player materials at no additional cost (I have a small bookshelf full of materials that I would want to access for D&D beyond and VTTs)... but when I make this fair suggestion I instead get to hear about how this is somehow unfair or such while Beyond and WotC try to find some new and exciting way to extract money from my pocket.