D&D General Lorraine Williams: Is it Time for a Reevaluation?

[Snarf Zagyg]

If you have any interviews, quotes, or statements that contradict his story I would love to read them. Pretty much everything I can find from Lorraine Williams directly is about Buck Rogers, not D&D.

I think you might have missed the point of my comment.

But sure, I totally believe that this guy was constantly thwarted in his ambitions by some "lady" who knew nothing, because he totally knew James Cameron and Francis Coppola who completely wanted to make a movie with him. Except the "lady" (remember, licensing Buck Rogers, brother wrote screenplays in Hollywood) had no idea who people like James Cameron were and didn't prepare for the meeting. The same James Cameron who, the year before had released T2. So this guy had to school the lady.

Sounds plausible.

 

[darjr]

I don't know. I mean, whom do you trust, that guy who clearly doesn't sound like a sleazeball making up stuff, or some "lady."

Especially after seeing the awe full freaking horrible sequels they did after LW was gone. They were, surprisingly, much worse.

 

[Bolares]

WotC as D&D publisher was certainly treated with a LOT of skepticism among the community (probably originating with people who'd watched their D&D groups dissolve as people moved to Magic instead and were still bitter), which is probably why they tried to hide who was the buyer. I remember when WotC announced 3e soon after purchasing TSR. Ye gods, the hysteria! There were legitimately people claiming that they were going to make it into a CCG. Apparently magic items were only going to be sold as cards in booster packs, and the only playable classes straight out of the core book were fighter, mage, thief, cleric. If you wanted to play a ranger or a paladin, you were going to have to buy booster packs until you got a rare card.

No, I don't know how people expected that to work either. But those were not rational times in the online D&D community.

This all sounds like the people scremming the MAgic and D&D will be one thing and the lore will be killed off because of Jace.... That's happening in 2021

 

[Umbran]

There is a very useful habit for considering conflicting stories about events.

Does one or the other story feel right to you? Do not trust that story. Our world is filled with dramatic tales of people who "followed their gut" and were correct. But in reality, your gut, your feelings on a matter, tend to alter your assessment of evidence.

Your guts are where all your unconscious biases live and impinge on your thinking.

 

[Bolares]

There is a very useful habit for considering conflicting stories about events.

Does one or the other story feel right to you? Do not trust that story. Our world is filled with dramatic tales of people who "followed their gut" and were correct. But in reality, your gut, your feelings on a matter, tend to alter your assessment of evidence.

Your guts are where all your unconscious biases live and impinge on your thinking.

Yeah, confirmation bias is a real thing.

 

[darjr]

Oh and about Solomon and Sweetpea there is this little gem.

Sweetpea Aims to Stop Universal’s ‘Dungeons and Dragons’ Film

In a countersuit against Hasbro, Courtney Solomon's company says it owns D&D film rights in "perpetuity."

www.google.com

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, confirmation bias is a real thing.

Especially when there is little objective data. We have conflicting narratives, all from people whose public image is involved.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't know. I mean, whom do you trust, that guy who clearly doesn't sound like a sleazeball making up stuff, or some "lady."

Neither of them in a case of a retroactive take on what went down. That, to me, is the primary point of this thread -- we have a new book out, it uses primary source documentation, it paints a different picture than what we have believed for years. Peterson can selectively choose what to bring forth, and of course the people at the time could have been writing with self-serving/self-promoting intent, but at least it trims off retrospective reimaging, and re-framing.

 

[darjr]

Also I trust Peterson to try and get things right. He’s come about on things when evidence he’s had showed he was wrong.

 

[jayoungr]

So that's what that was all about? I was wondering why anyone would do that.

You don't have to take our word for it--you can read Ryan Dancey's own words about it on this very site:

I also had the goal that the release of the SRD would ensure that D&D in a format that I felt was true to its legacy could never be removed from the market by capricious decisions by its owners. I know just how close that came to happening. In 1997, TSR had pledged most of the copyright interests in D&D as collateral for loans it could not repay, and had Wizards of the Coast not rescued it I'm certain that it would have all gone into a lenghty bankruptcy struggle with a very real chance that D&D couldn't be published until the suits, appeals, countersuits, etc. had all been settled (i.e. maybe never). The OGL enabled that as a positive side effect.

D&D 3E/3.5 - Ryan Dancey on the Goals of the Open Gaming License

The purpose of the OGL was to act as a force for change. In that sense I think it is an unquaified success. It changed the relationship of fans to publishers - any person with an idea could participate in the market if they wished. It changed the relationship of developers to publishers -...

www.enworld.org