Content Market Disappointment-no 5e in Initial release

[daplunk]

Originally Posted by BJ

We will have 5E, it will just take a bit more time. As for official WOTC content, that may be a thing of the far future but brace yourselves for the cost if it is.

The cost is to be expected.

There might only be 30% market share according to the survey results but 5e is the fantasy rpg beast in the market currently and I would be shocked if there is not a plan to tap into that. According to the The Orr Group Industry Report: Q1 2016 D&D 5e accounts for 35.44% of games being played on Roll20. Pathfinder is trailing behind that with 18.77%.

I won't be surprised, it wont shock me... it will disappoint me.

I'd love to know if there is a difference between the commercial content and our content. Like seriously... why can't we give you the SRD? This would take away the data load requirement leaving some clean up to ensure it works with the Content Submission Guidelines.

[Dr_Automaton]

Originally Posted by Lanmalchior

I've been buying WOTC product since back when it was TSR and own hundreds of their books.

(WotC was never TSR. TSR went belly up back in the late '90s, and WotC used its M:TG money to buy it and get in on those sweet, sweet IPs)

[Lanmalchior]

Wow, can't post anything on the Internet without someone trying to point out what was wrong about what you said.

The whole point was that I've been buying most of the D&D products back when they were called D&D and then AD&D and then back to D&D. Back when TSR published them, maybe not when it was called Tactical Strategic Review, but it's been a long time.

And TSR was part of WOTC for like 2 years as WOTC did buy TSR, and still used the TSR name until I think 3rd edition came out.

The TSR nearly bankrupting themselves twice is an interesting tie in, though. Both times that happened they cared more about putting out more new product then supporting what the players really wanted.

And WOTC hasn't been very good at putting out anything electronic in support of D&D. They could of really expanded and monopolized the electronic side of things years ago, but damn they keep blowing it. My experience with their electronic D&D support has been so bad that if they put out something now I wouldn't even look at it, unless a third party was releasing it. You can pretty much guarantee it would never be finished, supported or work right.

[MNBlockHead]

@Lanmalcior

Yet WoTC seems to do well with the MTG digital products. With new leadership under Chris Cocks, who has experience in the video-game industry, and his recent announcement of a new digital games studio, I have a small glimmer of hope that they will make smarter decisions.

Licensing their content to the various VTT providers was also a hopeful development.

[Toblakai]

Originally Posted by daplunk

The cost is to be expected.

There might only be 30% market share according to the survey results but 5e is the fantasy rpg beast in the market currently and I would be shocked if there is not a plan to tap into that. According to the The Orr Group Industry Report: Q1 2016 D&D 5e accounts for 35.44% of games being played on Roll20. Pathfinder is trailing behind that with 18.77%.

I won't be surprised, it wont shock me... it will disappoint me.

I'd love to know if there is a difference between the commercial content and our content. Like seriously... why can't we give you the SRD? This would take away the data load requirement leaving some clean up to ensure it works with the Content Submission Guidelines.

The problem here is IMO, all on WoTC. I suspect that if Hasbro had never bought WoTC, we would see a company a lot like Paizo. Instead we have this old stodgy corporation afraid of it's own digital shadow. Unwilling to enter the modern age.

[daplunk]

Specifically for this case I disagree.

The Srd has been available now for over a year. There are plenty of very successful 5e 3rd party products already on the market sold by companies that LW are already working with.

If there is no 5e content at launch then that will be because LW made a decision.

If there is no official Wotc content at launch then that I agree will have little to do with LW.

[daplunk]

New report out yesterday shows d&d has surged ahead even further.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content...rs-Gain-Ground

I know this doesn't necessarily represent the RW crowd. But if RW user base is primarily PF players then this certainly shows a gap in RWs offering and an opportunity to attract a bigger player base.

[gaffneyks]

Originally Posted by daplunk

New report out yesterday shows d&d has surged ahead even further.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content...rs-Gain-Ground

I know this doesn't necessarily represent the RW crowd. But if RW user base is primarily PF players then this certainly shows a gap in RWs offering and an opportunity to attract a bigger player base.

This survey is for Roll20. A virtual tabletop that sells official WOTC content.

This does show that WOTC will allow other companies to sell digital versions of their products. And that people will buy them. WOTC also has partnered with a video game company to put out a Sword Coast video game and 2 MMOs. We seem to be jumping to the conclusion that the problem with WOTC Content in Realm works is due WOTC. If they were so draconian, why would they partner with all these other companies?

It seems that for some reason that LWD does not want to or cannot reach an agreement to partner with WOTC.

Hence they have decided to focus on Pathfinder for the Content Market, which would make sense if the majority of their users are Pathfinder players.

I think it is a mistake to ignore 5th edition, but that is their call.

When I go play in the D and D Adventures league tonight I will tell the DMs who wanted to know what i though about Realm Works after purchasing it, that at this time i would not recommend Realm Works to anyone due to the fact that LWD stated that 5e content is not a high priority and none will be released when the Content Market goes live and that it will be in the far future before they have any official WOTC content for sale in the Content Market.

Even if they could not provide WOTC adventure modules, you would think they would come out with something in the content market that allows us to buy the Monster Manual or Players handbook for the mechanics reference or maybe provide Forgotten Realms, Eberron or Greyhawk settings for the Realm Works World Almanac. They should have been able to come to an agreement with WOTC on that at the very least.

As someone stated on another thread, all we can do is vote with our wallet.

I had just assumed, incorrectly, that Realm Works would have the same type of D an D content that Fantasy Grounds has, so I had saved up $300 figuring I could just buy a WOTC bundle for Realm Works and it should be priced similar to the Fantasy Grounds WOTC bundle.

I am an idiot for thinking that.

Now I just need to decide if I want to

1) Keep Realm Works, try to get the 2 groups I DM to go Pathfinder and get to use the Content Market.
2) UnInstall Realm Works, give my money to Fantasy Grounds or Roll20 and keep playing 5E.
3) Keep Realm Works, spend hours entering everything by hand for 5e, and let my cloud membership expire since i will not need it without the Content Market.

Not really the options I wanted, but it is what it is.

[daplunk]

Personally I don't think the discussions are not happening or not going to happen.

I just think its going to take longer than we all want.

It's one of those things I would have fought to have ready for launch because it would have been an explosion of hype.

Then again, perhaps that's the exact reason it has not happened. Perhaps the hype is being delayed until confidence in the tool and new functions is there?

[BJ]

Originally Posted by daplunk

Personally I don't think the discussions are not happening or not going to happen.

I just think its going to take longer than we all want.

This is the more accurate statement. Sometimes talks like these just take longer than we all want. We have no concrete information at this time but we are working toward what we all want as best we can.