WotC D&D Creator Summit from a physical attendees perspective.

[Dire Bare]

This is more of the engagement we need.

View attachment 281216

I made the mistake of scrolling down and reading some of the replies . . .

A lot of, "Oh really? Prove it!"

Sigh.

 

[Scribe]

Ok so let me see if I understand what point you were making with your original reply (post #18);

You want WotC to focus on the game aspects of D&D and don't want them to build the brand? You are not(?) interested in cultural sensitivity and diversity aspects? You just want more quality adventures, campaign settings, players options, etc?

I feel they are already doing so. I feel this summit had a clear enough intent, and I feel that there are people who are seemingly viewing it as Wizards responsibility to...I dont even know.

I look at conversations here, where people are seemingly in agreement about certain issues, but they wildly disagree on the meaning of what Wizards is doing, to the point of getting heated and demanding the other person blocks them.

I see conversations where people believe the removal of 'half' is terrible, others say that it needed to go, others call it outright erasure of people's identity (its an elf game) and others saying its proof that Crawford is racist.

What I'm saying, is Wizards isnt going to solve this naughty word, and its not their responsibility to do so. I dont believe Half Elf is a racist term. Others do. Others believe removing it in and of itself and having people choose their fictional elf game characters rules, is racist full stop.

Wizards is already working towards cultural sensitivity. MTG has made a huge deal of it for years, and the D&D group after stepping in it, clearly got the message following Spelljammer. Great, do better.

I absolutely would love it if instead of getting lost in the weeds of the outrage machine, they just provided a better game but I think this sums it up.

My point is.

 

[LordEntrails]

Yea, I see the view that some folks are wrapped up in D&D more than what is probably healthy. And for me I don't get too wrapped up in it despite all the time I spend on this site.

But, I've also seen people who are wrapped up in D&D, (or other social sub-cultures?) who benefit greatly from being so wrapped up. Who's world is so toxic, harmful and just plain sad that they latch onto one thing (like D&D) that they can grow with and be a happier better person who can at least in parts of their life strive for something they otherwise may never have. So, I can understand that maybe it's ok for them, at least as some part of their life's journey that they take on or involve themselves so emotionally to a brand or lifestyle that can do them more good than harm. I would have to let those people judge for themselves if their D&D identity is what's best for them.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Someone thinks they are cool.

This raises the possibility that someone out there, somewhere, is an obsessive collector of Payless shoes.

 

[Iosue]

While I think that in general, a summit like this shouldn’t have to involve tears, hugs, and “speaking truth to power” if everyone is conducting themselves professionally, I think it’s a mistake to write this off as people making D&D too much a part of their identity. This wasn’t a fan caravan that went off the rails. Everyone there has made D&D more or less part of their livelihood. The stakes are quite a bit bigger and a heck of a lot more personal.

Teos continues to be a much needed voice of positivity, empathy, and reasonableness. I salute him for it and hope it doesn’t come back to bite him.

 

[Blue]

Things like this scare me: "Wizards also made a significant investment in time and resources. Many executives, community reps, designers, tech teams, and other staff devoted all or most of this day to being present with us. They clearly also spent significant time on the logistics and worked with a PR firm for coordination. Staff will have to hold post-event meetings to review and collate all the information they gathered. For our industry, it represents an unprecedented effort."

That's 30 people, plus 100 online people. I don't care who they are, they don't talk for all or even a majority of gamers. Take this money, hire a few people for a full year to full time go on the various large forums, social media, watch youtube and tiktok, and interact. See what people are saying. Tell them direction, with official creditation behind you and access to the creatives what's going on.

The fact that they think this type of dog and pony show can work shows that they aren't in touch. There are far too many types of gamers out there that they are trying (and succeeding) in wooing that this small of a gathering for one day could ever hope to touch. They could spend this money much more productively if they didn't need s simple C-level success story that can be bullet-pointed and bragged about over golf.

 

[Blue]

Another interesting post which highlighted issues that were not clear (at least not to me) before. It certainly seems like WOTC wants to do what is right, future actions will be the proof of that of course.

My take was a variation on that. I got that the creatives understood the issues and wanted to do right. What I didn't get was that the executives even understood there were issues to be addressed in the first place. In addition to the explicit mention abotu the executives being blindsided, I think the lack of any focus in the planning and internal agenda shows that those putting this together were unaware of the issues, (or worse didn't want to address them in an event with such gaming media).

This is also consistent with the early tone-deaf approaches to the OGL debacle until Kyle stepped in.

We have a new executive team, from places like Microsoft, with a focus on technology and digital gaming. With long time gamers who were executives leaving late last year. This isn't an executive team that's been elbow-deep in RPGs for an extended period.

 

[darjr]

Things like this scare me: "Wizards also made a significant investment in time and resources. Many executives, community reps, designers, tech teams, and other staff devoted all or most of this day to being present with us. They clearly also spent significant time on the logistics and worked with a PR firm for coordination. Staff will have to hold post-event meetings to review and collate all the information they gathered. For our industry, it represents an unprecedented effort."

That's 30 people, plus 100 online people. I don't care who they are, they don't talk for all or even a majority of gamers. Take this money, hire a few people for a full year to full time go on the various large forums, social media, watch youtube and tiktok, and interact. See what people are saying. Tell them direction, with official creditation behind you and access to the creatives what's going on.

The fact that they think this type of dog and pony show can work shows that they aren't in touch. There are far too many types of gamers out there that they are trying (and succeeding) in wooing that this small of a gathering for one day could ever hope to touch. They could spend this money much more productively if they didn't need s simple C-level success story that can be bullet-pointed and bragged about over golf.

Just because they did this doesn’t mean they are not also doing that.

 

[Malmuria]

I think it’s a mistake to write this off as people making D&D too much a part of their identity. This wasn’t a fan caravan that went off the rails. Everyone there has made D&D more or less part of their livelihood. The stakes are quite a bit bigger and a heck of a lot more personal

Yes, though for that reason they are not representative of the “community” of gamers. Reading Teos’s account plus the discourse on twitter, my take was that the summit was a group of people who were insiders, interested parties who think they help contribute to Wizard’s bottom line and want a piece of the pie. They also deal with the fallout of being business partners with wotc (similar in some ways to other gig/service positions). Of course, business disagreements can of course become tense and emotional. But it does strike me as hyperbolic to cast disagreements over the terms of doing business in the language of social justice (“speaking truth to power” etc”).

Also, while I’m sure there was all sorts of bad behavior on twitter—there always is—there was also very legitimate observations (from Linda Codega and others) that this summit was about shoring up mutual business interest. My sense is that some of the influencers took exception to that because it hit too close to home in describing their actions as interest driven rather than being about their selfless “bravery” and “courage”. Rhetorically some of these folk are in a compromised position because they keep calling out wotc as a bad actor and as unethical and yet keep working in the 5e space.

My questions to them would be along these lines:

 

[Blue]

Just because they did this doesn’t mean they are not also doing that.

I was talking abotuthe money directly spent on this. With 30 people with hotel, food and such, with a PR firm, with renting out several places, this event easily cost more than $100K USD.

They can't also spend the same money on hiring online envoys. If they are also doing it, then they could have done more of it - say two more man-years added to whatever else - by not holding these exclusive events for just a few people.

You woo influencers to get word out. But to get word inward, that's not your most efficient spend.