Thread by @RobertGReeve

If Wizards of the Coast is working on a virtual tabletop (VTT), it's time for a long, hard look at where physical product design meets digital design.

In 20 years, I've spent thousands on D&D. I buy physical books for $50 and buy again in Roll20 for another $50. Thread 🧵

https://twitter.com/CHofferCBus/status/1442134843542814722

I don't begrudge Roll20 for making me buy again. They deserve a share for supporting 5e games in their product.

But if I pay for a subscription to a hypothetical WotC VTT and it doesn't let me validate my physical purchase for a free digital copy, that's a big pain point.

I've already spent $100 on two copies of Xanathar's Guide. I'm not buying it a third time.

After 8 years, 3,300 hours, and tons of laughter and memories, I like Roll20's ecosystem. If I switch, I "lose" the purchases I've already made. Switching would HURT.

Wizards gets a portion of all those 5e book sales on Roll20. Their incentive to create a VTT is clear: why share profits on digital book sales?

But if you want users to switch, that VTT needs to be mind-blowingly good. And make no mistake: Wizards DEFINITELY wants me to switch.

What's at stake? Let's guess, based on hints in Roll20's Orr Report.

Roll20 has over 8 million users, and 52.94% of campaigns are 5e D&D campaigns. That's 4.2m players. (Some might play with only the SRD, without buying a single book.)

blog.roll20.net/posts/the-orr-…

Let's assume a Roll20 table is 1 DM sharing their digital books with 4 players. That's still ≈850,000 tables.

Let's say 1 in 4 tables buys a new book. If Roll20 and WotC evenly split a $50 book's sale, each of them made $5.3 million in Roll20 digital book sales.

And between Magic: the Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons, Wizards of the Coast brought in $816 million in revenue in 2020. So this napkin math we're doing isn't unreasonable.

wsj.com/articles/dunge…

In business jargon, Roll20 has a "first mover advantage." Tech companies jump quickly on new opportunities because entrenched businesses are risk-averse.

Sometimes a "fast follower" can take your idea and do it better. But wait too long, and the first mover consolidates power.

Apple mastered the "walled garden" with the Lightning port. Any third party who wants to use it gives them a cut.

Now Europe's mandating all devices must have USB-C...and Apple would rather make PORTLESS PHONES for Europe than cede control. theverge.com/2021/9/24/2269…

I can only speculate at how much control Wizards has in this situation.

I doubt their agreement with Roll20 lets them pull existing content. But they might be able to delay Roll20 future releases, telling users, "Want the latest book early? Join our official VTT instead."

Or they could use it to renegotiate their share.

(A consumer-first approach would be to make a product SO GOOD and competitively priced that people happily switch over. You don't want a community that's annoyed to be there because they feel like you deprived them choice)

So how does Wizards incentivize a switch? Here's a provocative prediction: a monthly subscription could grant access to EVERY current and future 5e book.

It's a Spotify or Xbox GamePass model. Pay a little every month, but if you stop subscribing years from now, you own nothing.

WotC also owns a TON of otherworldly character and environmental art.

I'd be shocked if they didn't turn every Magic: the Gathering card with a person on it into a bundle of tokens you can buy and use exclusively in their virtual tabletop.

(art credit: @Scott_M_Fischer)

One asset Wizards still keeps exclusive is the DM's Guild. The first decision every indie 5e designer must make is: Do I publish to DM's Guild?

If I do, I need WotC's permission to sell print copies, and I can't adapt the adventure for Roll20.

support.dmsguild.com/hc/en-us/artic…

The DM's Guild license can frustrate creators. They can provide all the assets (tokens, maps, stat blocks) for you to manually upload to your own VTT. But it's against the license for a creator to adapt a ready-made adventure for the Roll20 marketplace.

If a creator wants to offer something on Roll20, Patreon, or their website, they can't use DM's Guild; they use the Open Gaming License instead. (Or get so famous you hash out a deal with WotC.)

I bet creators will be able to adapt DM's Guild stuff to the WotC VTT, though.

There's room to innovate—Roll20's not perfect. Their compendium treats books as reference docs. That's great for a book like Xanathar's Guide.

It doesn't lend itself to accidental discovery the way thumbing through pages of Eberron: RftLW does.

I also think VTTs could do more with live-streaming tools. As I prepare for my first live-stream next month, I'm learning so much about overlays, integrations, and audio & it all feels incredibly hacky. If I breathe on it wrong, the whole stream falls apart.

D&D and Roll20 both bring me so much joy by allowing me to stay in touch with friends through storytelling and play. I want to see both of them succeed.

And I don't think either of them will knock the other out of the marketplace. Roll20 supports ALL games. WotC is D&D, period.

I know I'm a rare bird because most people aren't buying books twice.

How would this change your 5e play experience? Does a "D&D subscription" appeal to you? Are you already subscribing to too many things?

What do you think? 🪡

P.S., I didn't see a Content Designer job posting but I have years of experience in exactly this stuff and I'm deeply emotionally invested, sooo Wizards, message me if you want to rock and roll ⚔️