Should WotC invest in digital tooling for 5E?

[MaxWilson]

What if WotC could also sell you:

(1) A D&D Coaching app for your smartphone which could not only read and update your character sheet, but also coach you through the rules for your class on each turn ("now roll d20+5 with advantage", "your damage on this attack is d8+15", "you still have a bonus action free to Second Wind, press this button to do so") and even run you through imaginary practice fights and/or DPR calculations.

(2) A 5E Encounter Builder with integrated difficulty estimator for DMs. The DMG difficulty estimator based on CRs and levels is necessarily simplistic because it has to be done manually. But if the tool knows what monsters are in the encounter, it can tell you how hard the encounter is for a specific party. Is 6 Quicklings using hit-and-run tactics too many for a 6th level Ranger, Wizard, Paladin, and Bard to handle? How much easier does it get if there are only 5 Quicklings? How much do things change if the Ranger knows Spike Growth?

(3) A Mass Combat mode for higher-level play which doesn't require you to stop playing by 5E rules. When 200 hobgoblins and 10 hill giants are besieging 30 dwarves in their fortification, what actually happens under 5E if a 13th level party attacks the hobgoblins from the rear? What if you could run that whole fight using actual 5E rules in only 15 minutes from start to finish? Would high-level adventures become more varied and fun?

If they made these things, would you approve?

[Kane0]

Approve? Probably.
Purchase it myself? Probably not.

[PhantomSoul]

Approve? Probably.
Purchase it myself? Probably not.

Agreed.

For (1), I could see suggesting it to a newbie (especially someone only doing a one-shot to see if they're interested in the game at all). I'd probably never suggest it to anyone otherwise unless they liked the game but really couldn't pick up the system, just because I think they'd rely on it (which could take them out of the social aspect or could mean they have less understanding of the character and what characters can do in general). For an intro/tester, though, it could be great. But I usually end up hating tutorials in videos games pretty fast... often long before the tutorial ends my first time!

For (2), I'd be curious to see how well it worked, but I suspect I'd run elsewhere really fast (integration with content already purchased, compatibility with homebrew, inevitably not sensitive enough to encounter context and player characters, and often random encounter generators are fun inspiration sources more than tools I use during a game).

For (3), I'd need to see what the implementation idea is.

Overall, though, I think the biggest problem is that I'm not convinced WotC would end up making a program that's useful or appealing to me, and it seems particularly unlikely that they'd make a program worth paying for. (I also am a grumpy old man who would refuse it if it were only available as an app and not as an in-browser tool or perhaps a downloaded computer program. App versions of essentially everything just tends to be hot garbage, and for a long time now I've usually had a computer available as a player (or use a custom character sheet that actually works for character abilities) and certainly as a DM (we already have tools I don't see WotC plausibly replacing).

[MaxWilson]

Agreed.

For (1), I could see suggesting it to a newbie (especially someone only doing a one-shot to see if they're interested in the game at all). I'd probably never suggest it to anyone otherwise unless they liked the game but really couldn't pick up the system, just because I think they'd rely on it (which could take them out of the social aspect or could mean they have less understanding of the character and what characters can do in general). For an intro/tester, though, it could be great. But I usually end up hating tutorials in videos games pretty fast... often long before the tutorial ends my first time!

For (2), I'd be curious to see how well it worked, but I suspect I'd run elsewhere really fast (integration with content already purchased, compatibility with homebrew, inevitably not sensitive enough to encounter context and player characters, and often random encounter generators are fun inspiration sources more than tools I use during a game).

For (3), I'd need to see what the implementation idea is.

Overall, though, I think the biggest problem is that I'm not convinced WotC would end up making a program that's useful or appealing to me, and it seems particularly unlikely that they'd make a program worth paying for. (I also am a grumpy old man who would refuse it if it were only available as an app and not as an in-browser tool or perhaps a downloaded computer program. App versions of essentially everything just tends to be hot garbage, and for a long time now I've usually had a computer available as a player (or use a custom character sheet that actually works for character abilities) and certainly as a DM (we already have tools I don't see WotC plausibly replacing).

RE: (1) yes, exactly. Onboarding new players and teaching them the rules until they are comfortable is the point. You're SUPPOSED to outgrow this coach, although I suspect from experience that some players never will and that's okay too. DMs should be able to focus on the story and play experience, not on checking player math. Making it free would probably be a good idea.

(2) Okay. I agree that homebrew integration is a must.

(3) Agree.

I agree that web page support in addition to app support is a must. (I'm thinking of how valuable kobold.club has been to me.)

I don't really expect WotC to do any of this stuff but I think they should, and I'm working on an open source version of #3 for my own use (have been for years, off and on, so it's fair to call it 'vaporware' but hey, at least the code is freely available on github). I wish I could just buy it from WotC because I would love to play a Blood War campaign where hundreds of Baatezu battle thousands of Tanar'ri and 20th level Fighters and 20th level Wizards are equally valuable, the Fighters taking leading troops and taking down individual enemy champions all battle long, and the wizards unleashing spells like Sickening Radiance and Meteor Swarm at key moments to destroy enemy reserves and turn the tide of battle. In my head that's what high-level D&D is all about, but it's a pain to actually run under 5th edition rules.

[meandean]

It's 2021, so, yeah.

[PhantomSoul]

I don't really expect WotC to do any of this stuff but I think they should, and I'm working on an open source version of #3 for my own use (have been for years, off and on, so it's fair to call it 'vaporware' but hey, at least the code is freely available on github). I wish I could just buy it from WotC because I would love to play a Blood War campaign where hundreds of Baatezu battle thousands of Tanar'ri and 20th level Fighters and 20th level Wizards are equally valuable, the Fighters taking leading troops and taking down individual enemy champions all battle long, and the wizards unleashing spells like Sickening Radiance and Meteor Swarm at key moments to destroy enemy reserves and turn the tide of battle. In my head that's what high-level D&D is all about, but it's a pain to actually run under 5th edition rules.

I definitely agree that it would be great to have approachable official rules (bonus points if there's an implementation to lower the burden for people not using it much) for something like that; unofficial mass combat rules or just turning the scene into dice-mediated narration works (as appropriate for the combat), but having something with official support would be great. The Mob attacks/damage in the DMG are a nice idea, but it just doesn't feel like it fits as much with 5e in fluid play.

[Kane0]

WotC would have to find some sort of niche to be profitable. We already have kobold fight club, donjon, fantasynamegenerator and more available to anyone that is reading this post.

So something to train up newbies or simulate large scale combat would be a potential niche, but then comes the question of profit.

[Sparky McDibben]

What if WotC could also sell you:

(1) A D&D Coaching app for your smartphone which could not only read and update your character sheet, but also coach you through the rules for your class on each turn ("now roll d20+5 with advantage", "your damage on this attack is d8+15", "you still have a bonus action free to Second Wind, press this button to do so") and even run you through imaginary practice fights and/or DPR calculations.

(2) A 5E Encounter Builder with integrated difficulty estimator for DMs. The DMG difficulty estimator based on CRs and levels is necessarily simplistic because it has to be done manually. But if the tool knows what monsters are in the encounter, it can tell you how hard the encounter is for a specific party. Is 6 Quicklings using hit-and-run tactics too many for a 6th level Ranger, Wizard, Paladin, and Bard to handle? How much easier does it get if there are only 5 Quicklings? How much do things change if the Ranger knows Spike Growth?

(3) A Mass Combat mode for higher-level play which doesn't require you to stop playing by 5E rules. When 200 hobgoblins and 10 hill giants are besieging 30 dwarves in their fortification, what actually happens under 5E if a 13th level party attacks the hobgoblins from the rear? What if you could run that whole fight using actual 5E rules in only 15 minutes from start to finish? Would high-level adventures become more varied and fun?

If they made these things, would you approve?

No - these things are not core competencies for Wizards of the Coast. They should be focused on selling their system and their ideas, not how to create tools for leveraging them, especially when they have no institutional capacity in that regard, and the last time they tried it (4th Edition) it didn't work out very well. For examples of how this could play out in practice, see mid-80's and 90's Disney acquisitions. As Porter would say, "The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do." (Porter, M. E. 1996. What is a strategy? Harvard Business Review (November-December): 61-78)

[Hael]

Those are kinda niche but useful applications, so sure why not.

What they really should have control over, is the whole LFG aspect of online DND. Meeting halls, as well as calendar planners and chat rooms to help facilitate setting things up.

Right now, finding a game where you don’t know anyone is a pita and requires going to various forums (mostly in English mind you), multiple discords and wasting a lot of time researching where to go and what to say. That’s silly, it could be easier in this day and age.

Character sheets alla DDB would be nice, but not strictly necessary, but I very much like having online tools for various modules available to the DM like most of the VTTs do.

[MaxWilson]

WotC would have to find some sort of niche to be profitable. We already have kobold fight club, donjon, fantasynamegenerator and more available to anyone that is reading this post.

So something to train up newbies or simulate large scale combat would be a potential niche, but then comes the question of profit.

I think the profit for WotC comes in terms of strengthening the D&D brand and providing a better play experience--selling more books and making the IP more valuable for movies/merchandise. Making a profit off the tooling might be nice too of course but is not the only way to profit, if you already own the D&D brand.


No - these things are not core competencies for Wizards of the Coast. They should be focused on selling their system and their ideas, not how to create tools for leveraging them, especially when they have no institutional capacity in that regard, and the last time they tried it (4th Edition) it didn't work out very well. For examples of how this could play out in practice, see mid-80's and 90's Disney acquisitions. As Porter would say, "The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do." (Porter, M. E. 1996. What is a strategy? Harvard Business Review (November-December): 61-78)


Those are kinda niche but useful applications, so sure why not.

What they really should have control over, is the whole LFG aspect of online DND. Meeting halls, as well as calendar planners and chat rooms to help facilitate setting things up.

Right now, finding a game where you don’t know anyone is a pita and requires going to various forums (mostly in English mind you), multiple discords and wasting a lot of time researching where to go and what to say. That’s silly, it could be easier in this day and age.

Character sheets alla DDB would be nice, but not strictly necessary, but I very much like having online tools for various modules available to the DM like most of the VTTs do.

1000% agree that they should be actively working on the LFG experience. AL was brilliant but there's more work to do.

[Gignere]

1000% agree that they should be actively working on the LFG experience. AL was brilliant but there's more work to do.

I would totally pay for a subscription service that supported a group of professional DMs.

[MaxWilson]

I would totally pay for a subscription service that supported a group of professional DMs.

I might not pay for a professional DM per se but I would pay $20/mo plus $10/session hour for a professional DM running a West Marches/Head of Vecna-style game world where I'm indirectly interacting with/competing against other players in other parties. That open world adds enough value for me to pay for, as opposed to thinking "I could do this better on my own for free."

I'd want it coupled with a message board or some other way to interact with the player universe between game sessions, and it might be best to limit each universe to 30 (or 100?) active players, instead of putting all players everywhere into the same game universe.

[fbelanger]

Dream on, for mass combat we don’t have any official rules!

[MaxWilson]

Dream on, for mass combat we don’t have any official rules!

Except the PHB rules. The problem is that the PHB rules don't scale well without digital tooling.

[Mellack]

While the suggestions of programs for helping play D&D seem interesting, none of them seem to me to have widespread utility. I think they would never be financially viable, therefore not actually get made. How much would people pay for a program to walk you through using a character that only gets used a couple of times? Would that be enough to pay for making it and keeping it updated with new material as it comes out? Probably not.

[Amdy_vill]

should yes, can they no.

I hear conversations like this a lot and what people don't realize is Wotc makes money by selling the right to digitally distribute their content. while some digital tools would not be a problem like dice and tools that only use the srd content anything beyond that will be a problem as WotC would be selling content that they have sold the right to sell digitally to other groups, which may be considered a conflict of interest. this is why they currently lack produces like his. while they could make products like this and do it in a way that does not cause any conflict there is still the danger of a suit even without a real conflict of problem being present. that probably why we do see any official dnd tools currently, it is also the reason we don't see coupon codes in dnd books for sites like dndbeyond and roll20. it's also why we don't see pdf by wotc.

I don't think wotc know how big dnd 5e was going to get so they were fine moving the digital produces from in-house to licensed with the edition. I think they should probably have an official digital product for 6e

[Catullus64]

I fail to see how, according to your description, #3 actually requires digitization, except in the sense of a memory aid. Rules that abstract mass combat at higher levels into rules that mostly reflect the normal individual-scale combat are a good idea, digital or no.

As for the other proposals, I'm ambivalent. D&D has a dual nature: it's an activity you participate in with friends, driven first and foremost by your own creativity and social relationships; it's also a product and intellectual property owned and published by a multinational conglomerate. As it is now, you can buy one to three books for $50 US apiece, a few sets of dice, and that's all the money you ever really need to spend to play D&D. I feel like an increased emphasis on proprietary software and tools could shift the game more towards the "Product" side of its nature than the "Hobby" side.

[MaxWilson]

While the suggestions of programs for helping play D&D seem interesting, none of them seem to me to have widespread utility. I think they would never be financially viable, therefore not actually get made. How much would people pay for a program to walk you through using a character that only gets used a couple of times? Would that be enough to pay for making it and keeping it updated with new material as it comes out? Probably not.

If you're the owner of the IP that the app is onboarding people onto? Maybe yes.


I fail to see how, according to your description, #3 actually requires digitization, except in the sense of a memory aid. Rules that abstract mass combat at higher levels into rules that mostly reflect the normal individual-scale combat are a good idea, digital or no.

Tools are needed in order to avoid changing the rules. Have you ever tried to run a large scale combat under raw 5E rules, e.g. Huitjin and 8 Merregons, 30 Spinagons, and 200 Lemures vs. 50 Armanites, a Marilith, a Balor, and 300 Dretches? It's totally infeasible IME even BEFORE you add in PCs on one side or the other Stunning the Balor, drawing fire from the Armanites (monk with Empty Body and Evasion), wiping out hordes of Dretches with Sickening Radiance, buffing Huitjin with Greater Invisibility, casting Confusion on seven of the Armanites, etc.

Battles with stealth are even worse. Even a dozen Shadows, Drow, or Skulks in a stealth-on-stealth battle with stealthy PCs are a pain to run fairly (concealing the hidden monsters'/characters' positions from those whose Perception isn't high enough to beat the Stealth roll), much less dozens or hundreds.

In practice what happens instead is that DMs handwave these battles and just declare a result, but that denies the players the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the battle beyond broad strokes. It doesn't feel real because it's not, it's just a guesstimate. Automation is one way not to have to guesstimate.

[Catullus64]

If you're the owner of the IP that the app is onboarding people onto? Maybe yes.



Tools are needed in order to avoid changing the rules. Have you ever tried to run a large scale combat under raw 5E rules, e.g. Huitjin and 8 Merregons, 30 Spinagons, and 200 Lemures vs. 50 Armanites, a Marilith, a Balor, and 300 Dretches? It's totally infeasible IME even BEFORE you add in PCs on one side or the other Stunning the Balor, drawing fire from the Armanites (monk with Empty Body and Evasion), wiping out hordes of Dretches with Sickening Radiance, buffing Huitjin with Greater Invisibility, casting Confusion on seven of the Armanites, etc.

Battles with stealth are even worse. Even a dozen Shadows, Drow, or Skulks in a stealth-on-stealth battle with stealthy PCs are a pain to run fairly (concealing the hidden monsters'/characters' positions from those whose Perception isn't high enough to beat the Stealth roll), much less dozens or hundreds.

In practice what happens instead is that DMs handwave these battles and just declare a result, but that denies the players the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the battle beyond broad strokes. It doesn't feel real because it's not, it's just a guesstimate. Automation is one way not to have to guesstimate.

I've done battles on that scale, because I invented my own rules for doing so. I didn't say that additional rules aren't needed to make battles on that scale practical. I merely questioned how that necessarily involves a digital app, rather than a few pages of additional sub-rules in the DMG; automation would be easier on the DM, certainly, but not an integral part of having rules for mass combat resolution.

This game started off as a scaling-down of unit-scale miniatures wargaming, so its' core principles of combat, even after 40-odd years of evolution, are pretty amenable to being scaled back up, and doing so in a way that a reasonably prepared DM can handle it without need of a computer.

[Tanarii]

(1) No, and I don't allow electronic devices at the table, so (assuming I get some again when game stores reopen) neither would my players.

(2) No, I don't need that, I don't calculate difficulty for specific parties. For generic parties I've already got the tables when I want to calculate difficulty. All I need is a calculator.

(3) No, because I don't allow electronic devices at the table.

[MaxWilson]

I've done battles on that scale, because I invented my own rules for doing so. I didn't say that additional rules aren't needed to make battles on that scale practical. I merely questioned how that necessarily involves a digital app, rather than a few pages of additional sub-rules in the DMG; automation would be easier on the DM, certainly, but not an integral part of having rules for mass combat resolution.

This game started off as a scaling-down of unit-scale miniatures wargaming, so its' core principles of combat, even after 40-odd years of evolution, are pretty amenable to being scaled back up, and doing so in a way that a reasonably prepared DM can handle it without need of a computer.

It doesn't strictly require a digital app, but after several attempts at mass combat rules both in 5E and in prior editions it seems to me that there is no set of mass combat rules which is both simple to run and satisfying to a large fraction of the player base. I've never seen it done well enough to satisfy potential users.

A player doesn't want his Fireball or Hold Person spell to behave differently in mass combat than in regular combat against the same number of foes. It undermines suspension of disbelief.

Maybe you've already solved this problem and everybody loves your system. Good for you if so.

[Zhorn]

(1) & (2) - Good ideas for third parties, not for WotC. Their top priority should be on producing quality content for what the game is meant for: pen&paper table top with dice. It they shift focus to digital integration then there'll be an expectation of games having a digital component to them, undermining the whole premise of accessibility.
A big draw that got me into playing D&D was I can do it while unplugged. An escape from all digital devices. If the game required a digital component to play, I'd be playing a different videogame instead.

(3) - At that point you're better off playing a different game system. Applying 5e's combat rules and damage values on mass combat is just too cumbersome. In play for those scenarios I tend to zoom in and focus on small snapshots involving just where the party is and what they are facing immediately (skirmishes and waves), with the larger battle 'off-screen' beyond the edges o the immediate battlemap. If the players want to take control of the whole battle, we'll break out the warhammer books and use those instead, but generally advise against it on the stance that they are in control of their own characters, not controlling a squad of 30+ troops working as if they are some hive mind in constant communication. Different views on what the game is, but army simulators and role playing games are different beasts.

[Ir0ns0ul]

What if WotC could also sell you:

(1) A D&D Coaching app for your smartphone which could not only read and update your character sheet, but also coach you through the rules for your class on each turn ("now roll d20+5 with advantage", "your damage on this attack is d8+15", "you still have a bonus action free to Second Wind, press this button to do so") and even run you through imaginary practice fights and/or DPR calculations.

I would love if the brain behind that was LudicSavant.

[Avonar]

1) & 2) These are nice ideas but I don't see them working in reality. You can't get an app to accurately read a situation because so much of the situation is purely what the DM says, the location etc. How can the app know what to recommend if it doesn't know where the characters are, what they see and what they know? There might be some generic things that could work, second wind as your example, but mostly no.

The encounter generator is even more wishful thinking. Any class can have such vastly varied builds that there is no way to do this well. You say the party has a wizard. Are they an evocation blasty wizard or a tricksy illusion wizard? What spells did they prepare? How many spell slots are left? You're asking the app to calculate the impact of every single spell on every single creature and that is just a non-starter I'm afraid.


3) Doesn't need to be digital. Mass combat would certainly be nice to have for the power fantasy moments but something like this would need to be fully able to be done without digital aids too. I don't want digital only rules.