Smaller publishers' take on OGL on Shane Plays podcast

[Burt Baccara]

Shane Plays podcast talks with Zach Glazar (Frog God Games), Bill Barsh (Pacesetter Games) and Levi Combs (Planet X Games) on how the recent events around the OGL affected them, their views (it is speculation, though some of these people have some connections), and how it impacted their businesses and the people who work with them.

They Came for the OGL: 3rd Party RPG Publishers Share Their Experience – Episode 265 – 2/9/2023

One interesting take that the group seems to agree on is that yes, Cynthia Williams and the execs set the goals (e.g., better monetization), but it was a pocket lower down that read this charge and thought the OGL change was a good plan to execute on those goals (even speculating this could have come out of the creative group). Note: this is not my take, I am just summarizing one aspect of what is discussed.

 

[darjr]

Thanks! I’ll have to give it a listen!

 

[Retreater]

I listened to this over the weekend. The small publishers interviewed were still shaken up and angry with WotC over the OGL threat - which is understandable.
They brought up an interesting conspiracy theory (with some ideas to back it up): that WotC (in particular the D&D team - NOT Hasbro) were the ones behind the OGL debacle. And that Hasbro were the "adults in the room" who saw the damage being done to the brand, and forced the change.
Whether it's true or not, and whether this is an especially common thought (many of the smaller punishers are in a tight group), WotC still has work to do to regain their trust. And they better do it before too many publishers move too far away.

 

[Umbran]

(even speculating this could have come out of the creative group).

I am not sure what value that speculation has.

 

[Morrus]

They brought up an interesting conspiracy theory (with some ideas to back it up): that WotC (in particular the D&D team - NOT Hasbro) were the ones behind the OGL debacle. And that Hasbro were the "adults in the room" who saw the damage being done to the brand, and forced the change.

I think most people believe it's the exact opposite way round, and that's roughly along the lines of some of what Kyle Brink has been saying.

 

[Retreater]

I think most people believe it's the exact opposite way round, and that's roughly along the lines of some of what Kyle Brink has been saying.

The confusion comes from when Brink says that the OGL change has been years in the making and comes from a time before Hasbro paid much attention to WotC or D&D. That would seem reasonable that the start of the process might've come from WotC itself.

 

[SAVeira]

I listened to this over the weekend. The small publishers interviewed were still shaken up and angry with WotC over the OGL threat - which is understandable.
They brought up an interesting conspiracy theory (with some ideas to back it up): that WotC (in particular the D&D team - NOT Hasbro) were the ones behind the OGL debacle. And that Hasbro were the "adults in the room" who saw the damage being done to the brand, and forced the change.
Whether it's true or not, and whether this is an especially common thought (many of the smaller punishers are in a tight group), WotC still has work to do to regain their trust. And they better do it before too many publishers move too far away.

That is possible one of the silliest things I have heard yet concern the OGL mess.

One thing I have noted is that there has always been a good deal of hate directed to WotC from some quarters deserved or not. A lot of people have come forward and seem to be stating "I was right. WotC is evil." This has gotten tiresome quickly.

 

[darjr]

Hasbro doesn't make decisions like this for WotC, they never have. They may have laid the direction and certain may have approved the deauth of the OGL but they didn't make that decision. I think Kyle makes that clear.

 

[darjr]

the big confusion is that there are several different groups within wotc. Only one is made of the creators and the tt makers. That's Kyles group. They were only a small faction in all this.

And to me that's very sad. The ttrpg creators had a small, dismissed, voice in the one of the largest issues the game has had.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

I am not sure what value that speculation has.

In my view, it has value only in two ways:

1) It's "of interest" as the genuinely held perspective of some leading 3PPs.
2) It is an alternate narrative for consideration. Even if only brief consideration in passing.

Morrus:
I think most people believe it's the exact opposite way round, and that's roughly along the lines of some of what Kyle Brink has been saying.

Kyle Brink's narrative is, in several other respects, questionable. (e.g. "I honestly don't know who contributed to that unsigned statement.")

I personally "prefer" the narrative that J. Crawford, C. Perkins, W. Schneider et al, were definitely the "good guys." Yet another narrative is "conceivable." Who knows what sort of weird dynamics can happen in a corporate office space...even among creative folks.

Still, in the absence of further story, I personally would not not mull on the speculation that members of the Creative Team were among the "bad guys"--initiators and supporters of the OGL backstab. At this point, I still like to cherish the thought that they were allies behind enemy lines.