Bob the World Builder Interviews Kyle Brink

[mamba]

I understand that.

I do not believe most employees in the United States are working under any such contract (of which, the NDA is just one flavor).

Well, I certainly do sign some stuff about not distributing confidential information to people who should not have it, and keeping it secure, not really an NDA, but more than nothing.

 

[Loren the GM]

I guess the fact that I have never used a VTT is showing! My concern would be if I purchased the "mini" don't I also get the stats for it? How does it function without the stats? And why would I have the stats without the mini?

I know lots of others have responded, but here is an actual VTT example that might inform the conversation.

On Roll20, I have access to what is in the SRD. If I pull out a goblin onto the tabletop, it is going to generate a small round token with text that says "Goblin" on it. But I now have a basic representation of the monster on the tabletop.

If I want something more detailed, I can buy the 5e Monster Manual. It has all the stats, and there are included tokens with the art from the MM attached to each monster that I can use on the tabletop. So, I have not only the goblin stat blocks, but I have the official Roll20/WotC Token for the goblin.

Roll20 also operates a marketplace where artists sell their products. In this marketplace are lots of other goblin images for sale. Some are other versions of tokens, some are top down images that more accurately feel more like minis, some are isometric or 2d versions. Maybe I'm looking for specific types of goblins, with shortbows instead of swords, or a wizard, or with a twirly mustache, or a specific art style. None have stat blocks attached, and I can buy them whether I own any specific game content on the platform.

If I purchase any of these options, I can open my game, open the official Goblin monster, and replace the official Token with whatever art I have purchased. Or, I can put 20 different images of goblins I have purchased onto the tabletop, and associate the stats with that token.

I could also pull an ogre out of the monster manual, but assign it a goblin image I've purchased, if I want to.

Ultimately, it is highly modular. As DM, I have complete control. But I am limited by what I have unlocked (or uploaded myself, as I can add my own images as well into the art library). So, I could run with the stock Goblin token, or swap out to create an entire cast of characters.

Applying all of this to the WotC 3D tabletop, it could be a few different ways they provide this. Maybe there is a default single goblin model you get if you are only using the free Basic Rules/SRD content (if they even offer that as a playable tier on the VTT). Or maybe they just have a general humanoid model (think crash test dummy) or go with a text labeled poker chip for anything you haven't purchased. You could still play, but it isn't as pretty as if you buy the MM and unlock the standard models. And there could be even cooler skins for those standard models that you can purchase, allowing your basic MM goblin to look like a wizard, or swap out weapons, or have a funny mustache, or add custom animations.

This all feels like what most VTT's are already doing, just with a slightly different twist because of the 3D nature of the platform.

I'd guess that as far as stats go, if you try to purchase a model of something you haven't unlocked (either through the free/SRD/Basic Rules tier, or through a book purchase) they would prompt you to buy the stats (I mean, to me that would make good business sense to help people opt in to buying more content). But it might not be required - they might also be fine if you want to use the model of the minotaur you just purchased as the art for the goblin you already have stats for, kind of like you can just buy art on the Roll20 marketplace, which feels like what Kyle was getting at with his comments.

Sorry if this was overkill, just felt it might be helpful to compare to an existing platform to understand what already exists as a way to see what they might do.

 

[Clint_L]

About how much does it cost to buy a basic goblin vs. an official WotC goblin vs. a goblin from the marketplace?

 

[Retreater]

About how much does it cost to buy a basic goblin vs. an official WotC goblin vs. a goblin from the marketplace?

If you're talking about Roll20, they don't offer stuff that piecemeal.
Basic goblins come standard and free with Roll20 as generic fantasy tokens.
An official WotC goblin comes with the entirety of the Monster Manual, all tokens and stats (how many creatures - like 300?), for $30.
The other marketplace goblins vary greatly in price. An example I pulled was 12 different goblin tokens for $5.

Also, if you're looking for custom tokens, it's easy to download any art pic, drop it in Token Stamp, and make a customized token. It takes less than 2 minutes and costs nothing.

 

[Loren the GM]

About how much does it cost to buy a basic goblin vs. an official WotC goblin vs. a goblin from the marketplace?

The entire MM is 29.99 Monster Manual - Play on the Roll20 Virtual Tabletop
A pack of 24 monster art is varied, but around $5.99 (random pack, as goblins are free, but these are a good example of what you might buy) 68 - More Monsters 4 - Play on the Roll20 Virtual Tabletop
A pack of 24 animated goblins is $7.99 Animated Goblins - Play on the Roll20 Virtual Tabletop

 

[Burt Baccara]

Confirmed (again) future SRDs will be CC and OGL 1.0a

Still, there is a constant not-so-subtle slight of OGL 1.0a in all of these interviews as being short and not very useful. It feels like a constant nudge to people to use the CC version. Why?

 

[Burt Baccara]

One thing that strikes me. When the question is a tough one Kyle often says “I dint know I’m not a part of that department or that was before my time” yet he goes into great detail about things that are positive, in an authoritative way, about areas he’s stated are not in his area or were before his time.

Note however I am probably biased.

You are not alone in noting this. I had to go back to make sure I did not miss something.

Another theme I am seeing is saying somehting like, "we will keep OGL 1.0a" (paraphrasing), then keep lowkey dinging at OGL 1.0a as not being effecting in what it set out to do or a "short document that doesn't do much" (also paraphrasing, but pretty close).

I don't want to hate on this man, but I can't trust anything he says, it is all so problematic in that is all truthiess.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It feels like a constant nudge to people to use the CC version.

Because he is embracing open gaming and wants everyone to stop yelling at him and his team, most of whom were likely pro-open gaming, given how many of them came from there?

 

[Burt Baccara]

Because he is embracing open gaming and wants everyone to stop yelling at him and his team, most of whom were likely pro-open gaming, given how many of them came from there?

If that was the case, they could have simply issued a 1.0b and added revokable without redefining the word and ended it there. Instead, they moved to something that is not copyleft and keep quietly pushing it as better while also saying people have choice.

There is something about 1.0a, or perhaps what it has been used for and the 20+ years of OGC commons that they have an issue with. There is just too much of what Kyle is saying that sounds OK on the surface but just does not add up in context.

 

[Iosue]

How exactly is he "dinging the OGL" in any context other than explaining why WotC wanted to change it? And it's not like he's even giving his personal opinion there, he's just explaining the rationale the company was operating under, because people are asking him about that.