Kyle Brink (D&D Exec Producer) On OGL Controversy & One D&D (Summary)

The YouTube channel 3 Black Halflings spoke to WotC's Kyle Brink (executive producer, D&D) about the recent Open Game License events, amongst other things. It's an hour-plus long interview (which you can watch below) but here are some of the highlights of what Brink said. Note these are my paraphrases, so I encourage you to listen to the actual interview for full context if you have time.

OGL v1.1 Events

• There was a concern that the OGL allowed Facebook to make a D&D Metaverse without WotC involvement.
• Re. the OGL decisions, WotC had gotten themselves into a 'terrible place' and are grateful for the feedback that allowed them to see that.
• The royalties in OGL v1.1 were there as a giant deterrent to mega corporations.
• Kyle Brink is not familiar with what happened in the private meetings with certain publishers in December, although was aware that meetings were taking place.
• When the OGL v1.1 document became public, WotC had already abandoned much of it.
• The response from WotC coinciding with D&D Beyond subscription cancellations was a coincidence as it takes longer than that to modify a legal document.
• The atmosphere in WotC during the delay before making an announcement after the OGL v1.1 went public was 'bad' -- fear of making it worse if they said anything. The feeling was that they should not talk, just deliver the new version.
• Brink does not know who wrote the unpopular 'you won but we won too' announcement and saw it the same time we did. He was not happy with it.
• 'Draft' contracts can have dates and boxes for signatures. Despite the leaked version going to some publishers, it was not final or published.
• There were dissenting voices within WotC regarding the OGL v1.1, but once the company had agreed how to proceed, everybody did the best they could to deliver.
• The dissenting voices were not given enough weight to effect change. Brinks' team is now involved in the process and can influence decisions.
• The SRD release into Creative Commmons is a one-way door; there can be no takeback.

One D&D

• The intention is that all of the new [One D&D] updates they are doing, "the SRD will be updated to remain compatible with all of that". This might be with updted rules or with bridging language like 'change the word race to species'.
• Anything built with the current SRD will be 100% compatible with the new rules.
• Brink does not think there is a plan to, and does not see the value, in creating a new OGL just for One D&D. When/if they put more stuff into the public space, they'd do it through Creative Commons.
• WotC doesn't think of One D&D as a new edition. He feels it's more like what happened with 3.5. They think 5E is great, but coud be better and play faster and easier with more room for roleplay, so there is stuff they can do to improve it but not replace it.

Inclusivity

• WotC is leaning on the community to discourage bad actors and hateful content, rather than counting on a legal document.
• They are working on an adaptable content policy describing what they consider to be hateful content which will apply to WotC's work (no legal structure to apply it to anybody else).
• They now have external inclusivity reviewers (as of last fall) who look over every word and report back. They are putting old content through the same process before reprints.
• Previously cultural consultances were used for spot reviews on things they thought might be problematic, but not everything (e.g. Hadozee).
• The problematic Hadozee content was written by a trusted senior person at WotC, and very few people saw it before publication.
• 'DnDShorts' video on the internal workings and management culture of WotC is not something Brinks can talk on, but it is not reflective of his team. Each team has its own culture.
• In the last couple of years the D&D team hiring process has made the team more inclusive.
• When asked about non white-CIS-men in leadership positions at WotC, Brinks referred to some designers and authors. He said 'guys like me, we're leaving the workforce, to be blunt' and 'I'm not the face of the hobby any more'. It is important that the creators at WotC look like the players. 'Guys like me can't leave soon enough'.

Virtual Tabletops (VTTs)/Digital Gaming

• Goal is to make more ways to play ('and' not 'instead') including a cool looking 3D space.
• Digital gaming is not meant to replace books etc., but to be additive.
• The strategy is to give players a choice, and WotC will go where the player interests lie.

​

 

[MockingBird]

Happy to get confirmation that OneD&D will be largely compatible and they view it as a continuation of 5e.

 

[billd91]

It’s a really egotistical position to take. And kinda self-delusional on WotC’s part. If Disney had any interest whatever in their IP, through the incredibly limited and limiting OGL, they have had 23 years to exploit it. And haven’t done so. WotC’s IP released into the OGL just isn’t that unique.

i expect the concerns about Disney, etc are because there's a major movie on the horizon

I think bedir than has the right analysis here or at least an understanding of Hasbro/WotC's concern. Nobody made a big media intrusion into D&D's IP because nobody had been able to show it was worth it. Though Pixar and Disney did make a foray into D&D-adjacent territory with Onward... just as the pandemic was hitting.

I'm sure the corporate concern is predicated on the potential for the D&D movie to do really well and open up a credible market for a franchise or even cinematic universe.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

He did specifically mention it as being like a 5.5 too though (IIRC). I took that, from context, to mean that he sees it as 5e, not a new edition (i.e. 6e).

I think it was 3.5 he compared it to. So basically 1D&D will be a half-edition, which means half the community will consider it a new edition, and half will say it's still the same.

 

[bedir than]

Though Pixar and Disney did make a foray into D&D-adjacent territory with Onward... just as the pandemic was hitting.

Which had a tiny licensing from Wizards/Hasbro for two, iirc, creatures, but the rest of what was basically a D&D movie with phones and cars

 

[Morrus]

Inclusivity is unnecessary, as D&D and role-playing, in general, have always been as such there really is no reason to point it out other than to draw attention due to the fact. I have personally played with many different types of people across the spectrum and have friends as well that are the same too. As I have said to them and they have to me it was never an issue until they made it an issue, and we will continue as we always have to play it they way we want and change and including what we like or don't.

Anecdotes are not data, and the world is large, and the number of women, people of colour, and other groups in the hobby has indeed increased over recent decades, even if it hasn't right next to you. Inclusivity is important.

 

[Retreater]

Again... this interpretation is just weird. The face of the hobby isn't you now (though in the 70's, for the most part, it was), to think you are the face of the hobby is some weird privilege type thinking. It's a multitude of ethnicities, cultures, and appearances which was his point. And it's not what they want their fans to look like, it is what their fans now look like and those designing the game should represent that. And yes if it's dominated by Cis white males at this point, some may have to go in order to make room for others.

It's one thing to say "we want representation" and quite another to say that Cis white males "can't leave quickly enough."
And while I'm not "the" face of D&D - I have been an ambassador. They would be foolish and short-sided to cast aside their oldest fans.
But yeah. Sometime when I have time and I'm not raging, I should watch the video for clarification.
If it's as bad as I'm imagining, I'm out. If I'm wrong - well, I'm still taking a break from D&D until all this junk is sorted out.

 

[dave2008]

One takeaway I hope people note is the story told about how this happened in the first place.

And while the SRD is now CC and this specific case can’t happen again the people that advocated it are all still there. And while his group now has a greater say in things like this they got shut down before.

I appreciate Kyle but he’s not even in charge of the group who pushed this through.

While the good guys eventually won the day they are still but a faction within WotC.

I also think it is worth noting that Kyle specifically mentioned that Cynthia Williams was willing to listen and take action on what she heard. So yes, the same people who made mistakes may be there, but that doesn't mean they can't learn from them.

 

[billd91]

Inclusivity is unnecessary, as D&D and role-playing, in general, have always been as such there really is no reason to point it out other than to draw attention due to the fact. I have personally played with many different types of people across the spectrum and have friends as well that are the same too. As I have said to them and they have to me it was never an issue until they made it an issue, and we will continue as we always have to play it they way we want and change and including what we like or don't.

You know a sure-fire way to tell that your anecdote about playing with many different types of people doesn't reflect the reality of the hobby? The the fact that there's constant raging against explicit inclusivity efforts. If the hobby were as inclusive as you've personally experienced, nobody would care that WotC was trying to be more inclusive at their offices or in the materials.

 

[Morrus]

It's one thing to say "we want representation" and quite another to say that Cis white males "can't leave quickly enough."
And while I'm not "the" face of D&D - I have been an ambassador. They would be foolish and short-sided to cast aside their oldest fans.
But yeah. Sometime when I have time and I'm not raging, I should watch the video for clarification.
If it's as bad as I'm imagining, I'm out. If I'm wrong - well, I'm still taking a break from D&D until all this junk is sorted out.

He was answering specifically to the question about leadership of the D&D team at WotC being primarily CIS white males. He wasn't talking about you, or about gamers, he was talking about management at the company,

 

[Imaro]

Which had a tiny licensing from Wizards/Hasbro for two, iirc, creatures, but the rest of what was basically a D&D movie with phones and cars

Not just the movie... there is an actual rpg called Quests of Lore that Disney released (the game they play in the movie). It's actually pretty good though definitely aimed at a younger demographic than vanilla D&D.