WotC WotC Removes Digital Content Team Credits From D&D Beyond

According to Faith Elisabeth Lilley, who was on the digital content team at Wizards of the Coast, the contributor credits for the team have been removed from DDB.

The team was responsible for content feedback and the implementation of book content on the online platform. While it had been indicated to them that they would not be included in the credits of the physical books for space reasons, WotC apparently agreed to include them in the online credits.

It appears that those credits have now been removed.

I just discovered that I have been removed from book credits on D&D Beyond for books I worked on while at Wizards of the Coast.

Background:

While at Wizards (so after D&D Beyond was purchased) - with numerous books, my digital content team and I worked directly with the book team on the content, reading through rules drafts, suggesting changes, giving ideas, and catching issues. We had a full database of the content and understood exactly how it interacted.

Given that we were contributing to the content in the books, I felt it reasonable to request that team be added to the credits, but was informed the credits section was already too crowded with the number of people involved and many of the marketing team had already been dropped from credits. I felt strongly that anyone actually contributing to what is in the printed book should be credited though, so we agreed a compromise, that the team would be added to the credits page on D&D Beyond only, as there is no issue with "not enough space" on a web page.

I've added screenshots here that I had for some of the books.

At some point recently, those credits pages have been edited to remove the credits for me and the content team. Nobody reached out to let me know - it just happened at some point, and I only just noticed.

We've even been removed from the digital-only releases, that only released on D&D Beyond, such as the Spelljammer Academy drops.

I'm not angry or upset, just yet again, really disappointed, as somehow I expected better.

EDIT TO ADD MORE CONTEXT

It's not just getting the books online. I worked with Kyle & Dan to improve the overall book process from ideation to delivery across all mediums (you should have seen the huge process charts I built out...)

The lead designers would send over the rules for each new rulebook and we'd go through it, give feedback, highlight potential balance issues, look at new rules/design that was difficult to implement digitally and suggest tweaks to improve it etc etc. We even had ideas for new content that was then included in the book.

We'd go through the whole book in detail, catching inconsistencies and miscalculations, and I'm proud to say that we dramatically reduced the need for clarifications or errata on those books.

I'm not saying anyone on the design or book team was careless - far from it, they're consummate professionals - I am just illustrating the role my team and I had in contributing to the content, quality & success of the physical books, let alone the digital versions.

We should have been in the credits section of the physical printed book. We were part of the creative process. That was something we were actively discussing when I was informed I was being laid off.

Adding the team to the credits pages just on D&D Beyond was, as I mentioned above, a compromise while we figured things out.

My team were fully credited on the Cortex: Prime and Tales of Xadia books when D&D Beyond was still part of Fandom, before the Wizards acquisition.

In fact for those books we made sure to credit the entire digital development team, including developers, community managers and so forth - everyone who helped make the book successful.

I know that Wizards has hundreds of people involved and previously hit issues with the number of people in credits for D&D books, so pulled back from crediting some roles.

Would it be so bad to have to dedicate extra space in a book to the people whose contributions made the book successful?

I really don't think it would.

 

[Deset Gled]

The one that concluded with them putting the rules into the Creative Commons? Like all evil corporations do?

Um, actually...

Only the 5e SRD. The have yet to put the SRDs from earlier editions into CC, as they pledged to do. It's still on their "product roadmap", but in the nebulous "upcoming" section with no planned date. So they technically have not completed what they promised to the community.

On the one hand, it might seem like a minor technicality. OTOH, it would be equally trivial for them to follow through. So, take from it what you will.

 

[Clint_L]

What I take from it is that WotC has shown that they will respond positively to public pressure. So let’s focus on getting a positive result for these creatives.

Edit: making sure they follow through on the rest of the CC promise is important but should be it’s own thread.

 

[Sulicius]

For those of you with D&D Beyond accounts, you can enter a support ticket, saying there is a problem with the content on particular pages. Like, say, the credits page for any of the source books.

https://dndbeyond-support.wizards.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

I am trying to enter a support ticket, but I am a bit lost on how to do this right.

I have barely purchased any content on D&D Beyond apart from Curse of Strahd. Would the digital team also have been on that credit page?

Let's do what we can do to make sure WotC knows we care about giving people the credit they deserve.

 

[Velderan]

They attempted something dumb, then they backed down and gave more than folks were originally asking for. Take the win.

I would rather share the win because we both won.

 

[Velderan]

What I take from it is that WotC has shown that they will respond positively to public pressure. So let’s focus on getting a positive result for these creatives.

Edit: making sure they follow through on the rest of the CC promise is important but should be it’s own thread.

Trackable public pressure probably helps the most, like the ticket system mentioned upthread. Supposedly the biggest thing that helped get them to back down from the OGL changes was seeing cancellation tickets so entering a ticket asking them to fix the removed credit gives them metrics management can review to see how important it is to customers that their staff receive proper credit. Managers love metrics.

 

[TiQuinn]

Well, I can see where being negative all the time is bad. Let try this. I heard someone mention that wotc donated gaming materials to a school. Lets see what other good things they did? Anyone got anything? Seriously. Lets look at how they helped in the… lets be generous, last five years.

We can then look at their behavior in a more balanced light. On the good side, they've done nothing so wrong that it falls into a moral pit that I know of. They just made themselves a threat to the community and businesses around them.

If someone murders another person but is a really good parent, does that make them a good person?

No, you’d say the second point is irrelevant to the first.

 

[TiQuinn]

Motivations aren't important. Philanthropists build libraries and endow scholarships for tax breaks and praise. that doesn't mean that the libraries and scholarships aren't good things. WotC giving schools materials for their game clubs is good for WotC, sure, but it is also good for the hobby, good for the school, and good for the kids.

What does this have to do with removing contributors names from credits?

It’s a corporation, not a person. Two different departments or people within the corporation could be responsible for these two acts. Conflating the two is pointless.

 

[Reynard]

What does this have to do with removing contributors names from credits?

it doesn't. I was responding to a specific statement on the subject of motivation.

Next time, try clicking the little button next to the quote and going back to see what folks are talking about before being accusatory.

Because THIs is irrelevant:

It’s a corporation, not a person. Two different departments or people within the corporation could be responsible for these two acts. Conflating the two is pointless.

 

[TiQuinn]

it doesn't. I was responding to a specific statement on the subject of motivation.

Next time, try clicking the little button next to the quote and going back to see what folks are talking about before being accusatory.

Because THIs is irrelevant:

Rude AF. You’re the one who couldn’t keep on target in the thread, and my point is relevant. Corporations are not people and treating two actions as interconnected isn’t logical.

 

[Parmandur]

Um, actually...

Only the 5e SRD. The have yet to put the SRDs from earlier editions into CC, as they pledged to do. It's still on their "product roadmap", but in the nebulous "upcoming" section with no planned date. So they technically have not completed what they promised to the community.

On the one hand, it might seem like a minor technicality. OTOH, it would be equally trivial for them to follow through. So, take from it what you will.

More than just being on their road map, they continually mention it is coming in updates they don6have to make, and a WotC employee recently said here on these boards that they were definitely in the works.

But just putting 5E into CC was not something theybhad to do, and a real bold move.