Continuing the D&D executive producer's interview tour, gaming influencer Ginny Di asks a WotC's Kyle Brink about the OGL and other things.
100% disagree. That would be the worst thing they could do. Even worse than nothing, really, because as long as they haven't done anything, they still might do something else. If they just published the 4E SRD as is under CC-BY, it's almost certain that's all you're getting ever. Better not to give them that "out" and keep demanding a proper SRD.Literally just publishing the extant 4e SRD, useless as it is, under a CC license would be a huge improvement.
Perfect is the enemy of the good.100% disagree. That would be the worst thing they could do. Even worse than nothing, really, because as long as they haven't done anything, they still might do something else. If they just published the 4E SRD as is under CC-BY, it's almost certain that's all you're getting ever. Better not to give them that "out" and keep demanding a proper SRD.
Can you imagine. They put out 4E as OGL and CC-BY…then someone swoops in with the VTT support 4E needed and it takes off. D’oh.Now that so much has passed, for good, ill, or (most likely) in between, this is why I keep coming back to these threads on Kyle's interviews. I want 4e D&D put into CC so much I can taste it.
Oh wow, I had never heard this quote before, and now I will never forget it. Perfect for many occasions.A Churchill quote comes to mind
“You can always rely on America to do the right thing -- once it has exhausted the alternatives.”
I would definitely be curious to see if someone could do for 4e what Necrotic Gnome and OSR, in general, did for B/X and give it a nice polish.Can you imagine. They put out 4E as OGL and CC-BY…then someone swoops in with the VTT support 4E needed and it takes off. D’oh.
The Big Question - "how are you planning to regain our trust"? The answer to this is to stop lying to us, but he/they continue to do just that.
Snip
So it's up to you folks, whether you end up accepting what he is saying simply because he is saying it over and over again, or whether you continue to consider what he is saying critically and with a healthy dose of skepticism.
That's your interpretation of what I wrote, and it's incorrect. I am posing the question as to whether people are arriving at their conclusions after applying at least some level of critical thought, or willingly accepting what KB is saying as truth without consideration. I am not saying one way or another is right or wrong (but given that's the conclusion you jumped to, the issue is yours).Thinking that other people can't think for themself, even if they draw different conclusions is arrogant.
That's not a position I am willing to take (yet) because what I see is a corporate mouth piece telling everyone what they want to hear, while dodging some important questions with "oh I wasn't there so I can't comment" (which in my view is a completely unacceptable response if he wants to be taken seriously - given the role he is fulfilling, he should have found out the answers to those questions).So we can just accept that we have to leave behind what happened, and go on with our lives.
This remains to be seen. The energy is still high and plans of certain 3PPs appear to be going forward, and I certainly hope they get finished ... but whether they do actually go the distance remains to be seen.We also know that the attempt of killing the competition resulted in the opposite.
That's your interpretation of what I wrote, and it's incorrect. I am posing the question as to whether people are arriving at their conclusions after applying at least some level of critical thought, or willingly accepting what KB is saying as truth without consideration. I am not saying one way or another is right or wrong (but given that's the conclusion you jumped to, the issue is yours).
Agreed, I don't make KB personally responsible either. But what you have gone on to describe here is the very reason why for me, they aren't rebuilding trust. I think they need to be painfully honest. No-one, for example, would want to take ownership of that first response on D&D beyond, but someone should. Whatever executive authorised that piece of dross should come out and say so, and say they messed up. Should they lose their job? I don't know. I can say that I personally don't need or expect them to lose their job. But I want to see real honesty, and so far, I don't believe we are.And yes, after being asked about the same topic in different interviews, he should have some answers in the next.
But if he does not, I won't make him responsible personally, but accept, that at some point, he might not be allowed to go into more detail... and which we need to accept as a corporate decision, even if we don't like it.