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.

​

 

[halfling rogue]

Is it racist to want diversity - that is what he is saying. Not in the best way, but that was the intent.

It's not racist to desire diversity. But you should not seek to achieve it by being racist.

 

[This Effin’ GM]

My response was to an earlier post that I failed to quote so some of the context is lost, but I don't see how his statement is any less racist just because he's talking about leadership at WotC.

“I wasn’t saying that but I am saying it now” just want to make sure I’m understanding what’s happening here

 

[mamba]

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.

well, he was specifically asked about it and that all the faces of D&D are cis white males. Hard to not say anything at that point

 

[Imaro]

I wasn't responding to what Brink said; I was talking about what you said, which was in regard to "the hobby" and not employment at a game company.

EDIT: Looking back at the sentence I previously quoted, the use of "it's" is unclear; I'll grant that you might have meant "those designing the game," but it could also be read as your prior reference to "the hobby."

Okay re-reading what I posted I can see how it might not be clear taht I was talking about WotC teams/leadership and not gamers as a whole.

 

[Retreater]

That is a good idea, but to be honest I don't know that it will change your opinion much. It seems to me your well might be a bit poisoned.

Of course you probably agree with this: near the end of the interview Kyle says don't believe WotC words, believer their actions now (CC) and going forward. Also, he agrees with you that you don't need WotC to have fun playing D&D (or other games).

Right now I have to figure out how I'm going to calm down and deliver the best gaming experience I'm capable of for my two weekly 5e games.
Do I want to continue promoting D&D specifically as a brand? Do I want to bring this up at the state conference next month about creating RPG clubs? Do I want to encourage new players to buy into this brand?
This whole fiasco has felt ostracizing to me on a very personal level, from the very upper level management demonstrating that it's a business and not a hobby at all. Like your favorite sports team saying "we don't care as long as our fans buy merchandise and more than they ever did." Or the front man of your band saying "we don't listen to our own music and it doesn't really mean anything to us."
That is essentially what Williams and Cao wrote.
Am I ok with that?

 

[dave2008]

My response was to an earlier post that I failed to quote so some of the context is lost, but I don't see how his statement is any less racist just because he's talking about leadership at WotC.

Just reading the text, it is racist. Seeing him saying it, how he said, and what he was responding too is different IMO.

He as specifically being grilled about non-white cis male's in leadership positions. His reply was basically about the diverse younger generation in WotC taking over for the older generation when they move on. Basically he was saying, it will happen, but it takes time.

Not say it was worded the best, but I agree with his overall sentiment.

 

[Alzrius]

To be clear, you know he was not talking about gamers, just the leadership at WotC?

That's very clearly what Brink means. But when he says "guys like me can't leave soon enough for this hobby," those last three words tend to present the rest of the sentence in a way that's almost begging for misinterpretation.

 

[mamba]

Bringing more people into tabletop gaming is in no way predicated on other people leaving it.

people working on them within WotC on the other hand… there is only a limited number of positions, and that is what he was talking about

 

[mamba]

But regardless whether anyone is offended, that statement, that white men can't leave soon enough, is straight up racist. I guarantee you had he said the same about any other race 1) no one would give him the most generous interpretation to his words, 2) everyone would be screaming for his head to roll.

that might have something to do with the fact that no other group is as overrepresented…

 

[dave2008]

Right now I have to figure out how I'm going to calm down and deliver the best gaming experience I'm capable of for my two weekly 5e games.
Do I want to continue promoting D&D specifically as a brand? Do I want to bring this up at the state conference next month about creating RPG clubs? Do I want to encourage new players to buy into this brand?
This whole fiasco has felt ostracizing to me on a very personal level, from the very upper level management demonstrating that it's a business and not a hobby at all. Like your favorite sports team saying "we don't care as long as our fans buy merchandise and more than they ever did." Or the front man of your band saying "we don't listen to our own music and it doesn't really mean anything to us."
That is essentially what Williams and Cao wrote.
Am I ok with that?

D&D is very personal to me, but my relationship with it predates WotC or even my understanding what a corporation is. I have never cared what the owners of the company think of me nor what I think of them. They simply do not factor into my thoughts much.

What I do care about is the community that I have grown to enjoy through Enworld and other sites. So I am pained by your pain and morn the division in the community. But what Williams and Cao think - I don't really care. I'm more interested in Demogorgon's mad machinations than corporate CEOs.