Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
D&D Beyond Cancellations Changed WotCs Plans
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 8899047" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>They say that's not their intent. I'm not a mind reader, and I find it very plausible that they're just real bad at this, so lets run with that for the sake of argument here first.</p><p></p><p>If it's incompetence, I think it's <em>understandable</em> incompetence. The kind of incompetence that follows pretty naturally from the position they're in. The standard in the World of Corporate Brands is to have very tight control over how people use those brands. Morality clauses, the GSL's "you can't redefine" clause, legal language that protects the brand from misuse...these are all pretty standard in that world, however bad a fit they are for the TTRPG space. You can't license a Disney board game and then show Mickey Mouse doing drugs or whatever. The OGL doesn't stop anyone from making a Cleric of Sacred Nudity, and that's a risk that brand teams are not happy with. Whether they're a good idea or enforceable or whatever is kind of beside the point, the point is that WotC's Brand Team is used to a world where control of the things that could impact the brand is much tighter than it is with the OGL as it is today.</p><p></p><p>So, when the Brand Team sees that the OGL lets someone make a D&D-alike RPG and WotC doesn't control the content that RPG, they see a risk to the brand. Is it a big risk? Is it a realistic risk? Well, it's definitely not what Disney or Warner would do, and that's the world that Corporate Brand People know.</p><p></p><p>So, yeah, if you're a profit-motivated company who is looking to Monetize Your Brand, I think it makes sense that you're going to want to make sure to send the message that you don't want people doing Naughty Things with it. Even if it's actually a very bad idea, it's the kind of bad idea that's appealing to you. It's familiar. It's protective. It's even virtuous ("stewardship"). As far as blunders go, I can understand why they're making it, over and over again (because this isn't the first time they've done something like this!). I don't need to invoke intentional deception or hostility. Not that this rules out intentional deception or hostility, just a bit of Occam's Razor on my part.</p><p></p><p>"Gross Incompetence" is definitely one way to put it, but I think that loses significant nuance in its simplistic appeal. Imagining the situation more complexly, I can see the perverse incentives of market capitalism and IP management at work. And that's useful because it helps show me what can be done about it. Why cancelling DDB subscriptions has a big impact. Why WotC has made this mistake again and again (and why it's not something they're willing to budge on for whatever the next version of this is).</p><p></p><p>Shaming WotC for their actions, calling them dishonest, saying they want to ruin 3PPs, sure. Makes sense, might even be true, whatever. None of that is going to stop them from doing this. Clearly, they're still moving forward with plans in the next OGL iteration to gain more control over the content of games that use the next OGL iteration. That's not something they're budging on, even with all the public outrage. In their minds, DDB cancellations and 3PPs abandoning D&D support are a price worth paying when compared with the massive possible gains. And they're blind to the idea that messing with this legalistic license would itself hurt the brand more, because being controlling about branding hasn't hurt Disney that much, so why would D&D be any different? (well, they're going to find out, I guess).</p><p></p><p>If you want to stop them, you've gotta <strong>remove their profit incentive to do it</strong>. Which, in the theoretical world where the Brand Shenanigans are a big driver, means you have to take it out of their control.</p><p></p><p>Which is part of why I really like the bit about the ORC being set up with a third party.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 8899047, member: 2067"] They say that's not their intent. I'm not a mind reader, and I find it very plausible that they're just real bad at this, so lets run with that for the sake of argument here first. If it's incompetence, I think it's [I]understandable[/I] incompetence. The kind of incompetence that follows pretty naturally from the position they're in. The standard in the World of Corporate Brands is to have very tight control over how people use those brands. Morality clauses, the GSL's "you can't redefine" clause, legal language that protects the brand from misuse...these are all pretty standard in that world, however bad a fit they are for the TTRPG space. You can't license a Disney board game and then show Mickey Mouse doing drugs or whatever. The OGL doesn't stop anyone from making a Cleric of Sacred Nudity, and that's a risk that brand teams are not happy with. Whether they're a good idea or enforceable or whatever is kind of beside the point, the point is that WotC's Brand Team is used to a world where control of the things that could impact the brand is much tighter than it is with the OGL as it is today. So, when the Brand Team sees that the OGL lets someone make a D&D-alike RPG and WotC doesn't control the content that RPG, they see a risk to the brand. Is it a big risk? Is it a realistic risk? Well, it's definitely not what Disney or Warner would do, and that's the world that Corporate Brand People know. So, yeah, if you're a profit-motivated company who is looking to Monetize Your Brand, I think it makes sense that you're going to want to make sure to send the message that you don't want people doing Naughty Things with it. Even if it's actually a very bad idea, it's the kind of bad idea that's appealing to you. It's familiar. It's protective. It's even virtuous ("stewardship"). As far as blunders go, I can understand why they're making it, over and over again (because this isn't the first time they've done something like this!). I don't need to invoke intentional deception or hostility. Not that this rules out intentional deception or hostility, just a bit of Occam's Razor on my part. "Gross Incompetence" is definitely one way to put it, but I think that loses significant nuance in its simplistic appeal. Imagining the situation more complexly, I can see the perverse incentives of market capitalism and IP management at work. And that's useful because it helps show me what can be done about it. Why cancelling DDB subscriptions has a big impact. Why WotC has made this mistake again and again (and why it's not something they're willing to budge on for whatever the next version of this is). Shaming WotC for their actions, calling them dishonest, saying they want to ruin 3PPs, sure. Makes sense, might even be true, whatever. None of that is going to stop them from doing this. Clearly, they're still moving forward with plans in the next OGL iteration to gain more control over the content of games that use the next OGL iteration. That's not something they're budging on, even with all the public outrage. In their minds, DDB cancellations and 3PPs abandoning D&D support are a price worth paying when compared with the massive possible gains. And they're blind to the idea that messing with this legalistic license would itself hurt the brand more, because being controlling about branding hasn't hurt Disney that much, so why would D&D be any different? (well, they're going to find out, I guess). If you want to stop them, you've gotta [B]remove their profit incentive to do it[/B]. Which, in the theoretical world where the Brand Shenanigans are a big driver, means you have to take it out of their control. Which is part of why I really like the bit about the ORC being set up with a third party. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
D&D Beyond Cancellations Changed WotCs Plans
Top