TTRPGS, Blockchains, and NFTs

When Kickstarter announced recently that it would be investing in blockchain-based infrastructure, there was widespread backlash. Blockchain technology is environmentally damaging and is of limited use. Creators such as Possum Creek Games (Wanderhome) announced their intentions to move off Kickstarter, while companies such as Chaosium and Wizards of the Coast continue to express interested in non-fungible tokens, digital items which exist on a blockchain.

While I'm writing this article, I do need to point out that I'm not a great person to do so; my understanding of blockchains, NFTs, cryptocurrencies, and related technologies is very, very limited and my attempts to get a handle on the subject have not been entirely successful. I'm sure more informed people will post in the comments.

What the heck is an NFT (& what does it mean for digital artists)

What is a non-fungible token (NFT)? In this graphic designer's guide to NFTs, we explore how Non-Fungible Tokens work in the context of digital art and how you can start turning your digital creations into sought-after NFTs.

dribbble.com

Kickstarter is not the only tabletop roleplaying game adjacent company delving into such technologies. Call of Cthulhu publisher Chaosium announced in July 2021 that it was working with an NFT company to bring their Mythos content to a digitally collectible market, with specific plans to sell two different models -- the Necromonicon and a bust of Cthulhu -- from the Cthulhu Mythos; and while things went quiet for a while, last week the company tweeted that 'We have more - lots more -- to drop... when the Stars are Right." A Facebook statement from Chaosium's CEO appeared on Twitter talking more about the decision.

D&D producer Wizards of the Coast said in April 2021 that it was considering NFTs for Magic: The Gathering. More recently, an email from WotC's legal representatives to a company planning to use NFT technology in conjunction with M:tG cards, alleging unlawful infringement of its IP, indicated that WotC was "currently evaluating its future plans regarding NFTs and the MAGIC: THE GATHERING cards" but that "no decision has been made at this time."

On Twitter, ErikTheBearik compiled Hasbro/WotC's involvement with NFTs so far.

Gripnr is a '5e based TTRPG NFT protocol' with Stephen Radney-MacFarland (D&D, Star Wars Saga Edition, Pathfinder) as its lead game designer. OK, so that's about as much of that as I understand!

Some company in the TTRPG sphere have taken a stand. DriveThruRPG stated that "In regard to NFTs – We see no use for this technology in our business ever." Itch.io was a bit more emphatic:

A few have asked about our stance on NFTs: NFTs are a scam. If you think they are legitimately useful for anything other than the exploitation of creators, financial scams, and the destruction of the planet the [sic] we ask that [you] please reevaluate your life choices. Peace. [an emoji of a hand making the “Peace” symbol]

Also [expletive deleted] any company that says they support creators and also endorses NFTs in any way. They only care about their own profit and the opportunity for wealth above anyone else. Especially given the now easily available discourse concerning the problems of NFTs.

How can you be so dense?

NFTs -- non-fungible tokens -- and blockchains have been dominating the news recently, and with individuals and companies taking strong stances against them, it's fair to ask why. The environmental impact of the technology has been widely documented - it's inefficient, and the need for blockchains -- a sort of decentralized ledger -- to have multiple users validate and record transactions makes it very energy intensive. In an era when climate change is having more and more devastating effects around the world, use of such technologies attracts considerable backlash.

Other ethical concerns regarding NFTs specifically is that the purchaser of an NFT is not actually purchasing anything, and the value for the digital 'token' they've purchased is speculative. When you buy the NFT of a piece of art (for example) you don't own the art itself; you only own a digital token associated with the art. The whole concept is likened to a 'house of cards' or a 'scam' by its critics.

 

[overgeeked]

BOOOO-UURRRNNSSS

Sorry, what?

 

[Bilharzia]

Delta Green has been ticking along quite merrily using the Legend OGL, as has OpenQuest and the Jackals RPG. So if anyone wants to publish a BRP-derived-but-not-BRP game, even one using Lovecraft elements, they can do so using the Legend OGL. Now they can also use any parts of the Delta Green game which have been identified as open content. The Legend OGL has been available for at least 10 years now.

 

[MGibster]

Here's another video explaining NFTs.

 

[MGibster]

Hear me out, guys. How about a Call of Cthulhu modern adventure featuring the King in Yellow NFTs?

 

[Umbran]

Are they? Because being totally virtual doesn't make it a scam.

Like you, I'm not fully versed in the realm of NFTs. But from what I've been reading on the Chaosium offerings, that's basically what it is.

When you buy an NFT, you do not buy the actual artwork. That's important. You buy a unique token that is associated with a digital file. However... the digital file the token refers to is not necessarily unique!

"NFT ledgers claim to provide a public certificate of authenticity or proof of ownership, but the legal rights conveyed by an NFT can be uncertain. NFTs do not restrict the sharing or copying of the underlying digital files, do not necessarily convey the copyright of the digital files, and do not prevent the creation of NFTs with identical associated files."

That bolded bit is why they are a scam. An artist can create a digital artwork, and sell you an NFT for it. And you think you have something unique, but they can then sell NFTs for a million other copies of the exact same file. The only unique thing is the token, not the art it refers to.

Indeed, in the typical form, you buy the NFT, and you don't actually download the associated art - you use the token to access it from some cloud storage somewhere. And, guess what? You having the NFT doesn't actually guarantee the file will be there to access, now or in the future!

For the Chaosium "Necronomicon" and "Cthulhu Statue" NFTs, (if I understand them correctly) they are not investments expected to appreciate, they are digital artworks to show off to your friends digitally. True, you are technically buying a license, not the artwork itself . . . but that's true of most digital media including music, books, video, and even 3D print-files.

But, dude, you don't need an NFT to do that! Any time one of us buys a game book on DriveThruRPG, we get a digital file with art in it!

 

[Jd Smith1]

All I think of regarding NFT's and the Crypto currency "crap" is you get to own something that doesn't actually exist, sure you can buy stuff with it until there is a blackout or whatever else happens to destroy the said value of whatever it is you think you own.

You've just described money: strips of cloth-based material which can currently be exchanged for goods and/or services, but which have no intrinsic value. Money is simply an assumption that the government that issued it will continue to exist and people will continue to accept that it has value.

These days, most currency exists as electronic data as well.

 

[Umbran]

And blockchains, and NFTs are not needed for purchases of digital content in most cases, as far as I can tell. Only case they would be useful is if the users can then trade the digital content between themselves, and the content is unique, but transfers of ownership could be done through a central database, that your app accessess (and that it then rewokes the licence-code to use the object from the previous user).

Well, no. The point of using an NFT, and the blockchain under it, is that it isn't a central database. It is a distributed database. The difference being - if there's one central database, then really, your ownership is only as good as your trust of the people who own and control the central database. Blockchain makes the database public, not subject to any singular owner or controller. And not just publicly accessible - the database actually exists distributed out among the machines of the various people who use the blockchain.

 

[Dire Bare]

But, dude, you don't need an NFT to do that! Any time one of us buys a game book on DriveThruRPG, we get a digital file with art in it!

Yes. You don't need the NFT tech to sell digital art. I get that.

I think I'll bow out of this discussion. Opinions are set, no one's minds are being changed.

 

[Umbran]

You've just described money: strips of cloth-based material which can currently be exchanged for goods and/or services, but which have no intrinsic value. Money is simply an assumption that the government that issued it will continue to exist and people will continue to accept that it has value.

Sure. Heck, Emperor Norton issued currency, and it was honored in San Francisco.

The main difference is that folks buying bitcoin are doing so largely in the hopes that it will increase in value, while nobody expects the dollar they get as wages today will be worth notably more a month or a year from now.

That difference in expectation makes cryptocurrency a speculative investment, rather than a currency.

 

[Professor Murder]

Yes. You don't need the NFT tech to sell digital art. I get that.

I think I'll bow out of this discussion. Opinions are set, no one's minds are being changed.

Yes. Opinions are set. That is a thing that happens when people learn things and form opinions. What is visibly disingenuous is a claim that one just wants things explained and claims to have no dog in the race and gets defensive when their claim of having no opinion of their own on the issue is nakedly false. If you had no opinion, why would changing anyone else's matter?