• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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...

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.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Scribe

Legend
The bad thing is that the groups are having plenty of fun with 5e and aren't interested in trying anything new. For me, I was already getting tired of the system before all this happened.
So do I ostracize myself from the game? Do I stop coming to these boards and miss out on our conversations?
Pulling oneself away from a community you've enjoyed for decades is a hard decision to make. And I hate that I'm being put in this position, real or imagined.

Comes to a point where perhaps the "Official WotC/Hasbro D&D Messaging" just may not be for you.

Its a natural thing. I clearly remember when TV advertising was quite clearly no longer trying to be 'for me'.

Thats been Wizbro's version of D&D for some time now, and its only going to continue.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



dave2008

Legend
They factor into my thoughts because they provide the direction of the business. They are the ones wheeling and dealing. They are the ones hiring the design team who directly influence the game we enjoy. They are the ones who can make all of this terrible - as demonstrated by what "almost" happened over the past month - had they gotten their way. Had we not stopped them.
So, no, I cannot support the Caos and C. Williams of the world. I'm not saying you're wrong for sticking with this brand, but I can't do it on principle.
I never said I was sticking with the brand or more importantly WotC/Hasbro. Dungeons and Dragons, to me, has always been more than the company that owns it. And it was that way from the very beginning. I don't see much difference between the founders, the current stewards, and everyone in-between.

The world of D&D, and specifically 5e, is much more than what WotC offers or controls. I don't support companies, I support designers, artists, and products. There is a line, but I generally but what I want independent of who makes it.
 



Scribe

Legend
what conversation, this thing was over once they released the SRD under CC. Now it is just forensics ;)

As evidenced by the turn of the thread today, it would be better for it to just be an apology tour of interviews, without saying anything 'new', at least better for Wizbro.
 

Anti-inclusive content
Every time I hear someone say something along the lines "the game was always welcoming to everyone because you could play whatever gender or race you want!", I'm reminded of this comment on a video review of Chromatic Dungeons. Chuck said the same thing, and then less than an hour later admitted he wouldn't play it because he didn't feel represented. 🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️ The cognitive dissonance is strong.

View attachment 274916
. . .so someone refuses to play D&D because art in earlier editions don't meet 2020's standards of inclusiveness and diversity?

Art made for a game built on fantasy worlds that are normally based on a quasi-Medieval-European model, done decades ago, don't fit the current corporate-driven standard of including all races, genders, sexual orientations, disabilities and everything else. . .so he refuses to play?

It sounds like virtue signaling and performative outrage.
 

The bad thing is that the groups are having plenty of fun with 5e and aren't interested in trying anything new. For me, I was already getting tired of the system before all this happened.
So do I ostracize myself from the game? Do I stop coming to these boards and miss out on our conversations?
Pulling oneself away from a community you've enjoyed for decades is a hard decision to make. And I hate that I'm being put in this position, real or imagined.
I can hear how much this pains you. I have played D&D since the mid eighties so the game is quite special to me. I think there is a way to love D&D, keep playing it and enjoy the community and ignore all the other. Hope you find your way there.

There are actors I dislike personally but still find a way to enjoy their movies. Same with some professional athletes.
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top