WotC D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.

But the irony machine is thick.
I'd say your machine is broken.
You just claimed that speculation doesn’t need evidence. But when I do it, I’m adding snark?
Wait, are you actually putting forward the idea that your previous post was meant to be taken seriously, and wasn't a passive-aggressive bunch of snark with no substance to it? Are you actually, seriously, trying to suggest that? Because if so, you rolled a natural 1 on your Bluff check.
After all there is exactly the same amount of evidence that Vtt’s will impair creativity as boost.
Go back and re-read the thread; the discussion isn't about VTTs in general.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

True. Only the last couple of dozen pages have been about vtts.

The original point of the thread got left behind long ago.

But absolutely yes. I was 100% serious. Vtt play has made the hobby more creative. Look at the art production. There are dozens and dozens of patreons devoted to creating cartography for vtts. It’s a cottage industry. The DnD maps Reddit is huge and sees dozens of high quality pics uploaded every day.

None of which would exist without vtts.

Never minding how smaller press games get huge platforms for presenting their games that they would never be able to do without vtts. Entire game lines would vanish into obscurity without vtt play.

So yes. I do believe that vtts make the hobby more creative and that WotC bringing a vtt into the market will only increase that creativity.
 

True. Only the last couple of dozen pages have been about vtts.
Then I'd recommend reading them over before you end up rehashing points that have already been brought up. I mean again.
The original point of the thread got left behind long ago.
Yeah, and? Conversational drift is a thing (a different thing from misunderstanding the point, or for that matter, deliberately derailing it).
But absolutely yes. I was 100% serious.
Riiight. So the part where you said "I will not provide any evidence. I do not need to. It is possible therefore it must be true," was in no way threadcrapping? Yeah, no, not buying it. Even if your first line had an actual point, it was buried under the second. Own it.
Vtt play has made the hobby more creative. Look at the art production. There are dozens and dozens of patreons devoted to creating cartography for vtts. It’s a cottage industry. The DnD maps Reddit is huge and sees dozens of high quality pics uploaded every day.

None of which would exist without vtts.
Which is a nice digression, but once again we've already seen someone else try to twist the point into suddenly being about all VTTs and all instances of creativity, as opposed to WotC's VTT and imaginative play specifically. But of course, we have to have someone else come in, misread things, and steer the thread right back into the same rut it's been in.

EVERY. FRICKIN. TIME.
Never minding how smaller press games get huge platforms for presenting their games that they would never be able to do without vtts. Entire game lines would vanish into obscurity without vtt play.
Which once again has nothing to do with anything that's being discussed here, at least among the people who are actually discussing it instead of yelling "I can see the future! I have evidence for how the future will unfold!" and then saying that they never said that, other people did.
So yes. I do believe that vtts make the hobby more creative and that WotC bringing a vtt into the market will only increase that creativity.
That's great. Completely off-topic, but great. Maybe you could go start your own thread on it, since it's not really related to anything else here?
 

Mod Note:

We’re getting almost as many reports on this thread as the foreign escort spam threads, mostly because of rising levels of snark & other uncivil rhetorical flourishes. How about we all just dial it down for a while?

Mmmm’kay?
 

No.

Use a bells and whistles vtt to create a DnD Machinima like Red vs Blue.

But the irony machine is thick. You just claimed that speculation doesn’t need evidence. But when I do it, I’m adding snark?

After all there is exactly the same amount of evidence that Vtt’s will impair creativity as boost.
If the implementation is really solid and easy to use, I think it could free up some people currently using VTTs to be a bit more creative.

How? First, a lot of people are visual. That may trigger some alternative approaches. Second, if you don't have to worry as much about math and effects, that frees up mental capacity for other things.

From a DM's perspective there is of course prebuilt maps and (potentially) easier to build maps freeing up time and versatility. Again, if some of the work of running the monsters is now offloaded, that leaves the DM room for thinking about how to make the encounter more interesting.

At least I can come up with specific detailed reasons to support my hypothesis. Of course I don't really think it matters all that much, nor do I think it applies to everyone.
 

EVERY. FRICKIN. TIME.

Nobody is making you engage with them. If you don't like repeating previous arguments, then don't repeat them. Nobody (other than perhaps yourself) is forcing you.

And, by the way, reporting them, and then engaging with them, is very bad form. If you are going to call us in, you ought to step back. You most certainly should not SHOUT IN ALL-CAPS AT THEM.

Nor should you lecture them on the rules of the site - it starts to look suspiciously like an attempt to weaponize the rules and moderators to stifle disagreement or otherwise "win" the argument. We frown upon that, most sternly.
 

Which is a nice digression, but once again we've already seen someone else try to twist the point into suddenly being about all VTTs and all instances of creativity, as opposed to WotC's VTT and imaginative play specifically. But of course, we have to have someone else come in, misread things, and steer the thread right back into the same rut it's been in.
I do not have to misread things to disagree with you... I have not seen a good argument why the WotC VTT is so much different from all the others that you are uniquely concerned about it but not the others. I am sure you made those arguments, I just find them entirely unconvincing
 

Not based on what several other posters in this thread have put forward, with regards to the level of faith/trust shown to WotC (and, I should note, there's a difference between the company name and the brand name).

Really, cause I've seen a lot of posters who seem like they wouldn't trust WoTC if they handed them a check for $10,000 in this thread as well.

No one is saying quote only that line of text; just put that line in its own quote box. You've noted before how I break up quotes into several different boxes; take a cue from that.

Yes, I am very aware of how you break up everything I say into small chunks. No, I will not be taking cues from that.

Truly the height of discourse right here. You've come a long way from complaining about potshots.

Because WotC is known for maintaining relationships with people who don't care for them.

Which just goes to show you that the issue is neither dead nor buried, since the effects of that fiasco on the industry continue to be felt to this day.

See above; WotC is quite willing to work with "influencers" who they think will influence things in the way they (WotC) wants.

So giving a copy to one of their most vocal critics (who at least never delved into full on hate-filled rants against them) is showing how they don't maintain relationships with people who "don't care for them" but they are also quite willing to work with the community to push their goals despite what those people have said about them in the past?

They can't both be cutting off anyone who says anything bad about them, and also working with people who have said bad things about them.

So that they can better control it. Seriously, how is that in contention in your mind? We know they want to monetize things, and see customers as a barrier to that. Not to mention all of the things they've done to try and bring the industry further under their sway. Control is everything to WotC right now.

"Getting more sales" is how they want to exercise the control they're looking for.

You keep saying these things, that WoTC sees their customers as barriers, that they are desperate for control, and yet you lack proof, beyond gesturing widely to everything they have ever done (except the parts that show they don't do or think those things) and saying "But see! The Pinkertons that one time for Magic the Gathering! and Undermonetization!"

Yet every major creator they have worked with, has been critical of them and their actions. And they still work with them. And that means nothing to you, because you are convinced that they are evil.

Ah, so now you're granting my earlier point about the consolidation of services (which is another aspect which differentiates WotC's VTT from others). Of course, you dodged the issue of the character sheets themselves being an aspect of monetization, so there's that too.

Ah yes, the completely free character sheets, how could I forget them making money off of them. I never denied that they would be capable of using both, just that it wouldn't be required to get the VTT to continue using DDB

As an aside, do you mean the actual RvB (as in, buy it from the now-defunct Rooster Teeth)? Because if they want to do that, the window seems like it's closing fast (if it hasn't already).

No it isn't.
 

So if I understand correctly - we’re concerned that a WotC vtt, which no one has seen yet and we really have no idea what the final form will be, will somehow impact creative play despite the fact that no other vtt in the past twenty years has done so. We have no evidence to back up this assertion and no actual reason to be concerned other than the fact that WotC is producing this vtt.

Is that about right?
 

I do not have to misread things to disagree with you...
No, you don't. But when I say that there's a concern about the potential of WotC's VTT (if it's as successful as they want it to be) to disincentivize the wider range of imaginative play, and the replies are predicated on "you're saying that (all) VTTs discourage creativity," then your disagreement is premised on something I never said.
I have not seen a good argument why the WotC VTT is so much different from all the others that you are uniquely concerned about it but not the others.
Which is entirely your opinion, and that's fine. I think that they are good arguments, but at this point almost no one is actually replying to them as I've presented them.
I am sure you made those arguments, I just find them entirely unconvincing
At this point, the fact that the arguments I made are being acknowledged at all is head and shoulders above most of the responses I've received.
Really, cause I've seen a lot of posters who seem like they wouldn't trust WoTC if they handed them a check for $10,000 in this thread as well.
In this thread? I have to disagree with your there. The vast majority have put forward a stance that comes across as being not only entirely trusting of WotC, but also protective of them to the point of thinking there's no legitimate cause of ill-will toward them.
Yes, I am very aware of how you break up everything I say into small chunks. No, I will not be taking cues from that.
Then you can't really complain with regard to how a point you're calling attention to in a quoted post is hidden by how the quote box defaults to a collapsed state.
So giving a copy to one of their most vocal critics (who at least never delved into full on hate-filled rants against them)
The parenthetical part undercuts the rest of what you're saying here. The cited influencer is far, far from being "one of their most vocal critics."
is showing how they don't maintain relationships with people who "don't care for them" but they are also quite willing to work with the community to push their goals despite what those people have said about them in the past?
Do I need to actively point out that my previous mention of "WotC is known for maintaining relationships with people who don't care for them" was meant to be read ironically? I mean, I can understand Poe's Law being a thing, so I suppose I should have posted an emoji there to make that clear. Mea culpa.
They can't both be cutting off anyone who says anything bad about them, and also working with people who have said bad things about them.
See above. You misread my statement, but I'll say that one was my fault for not making it obvious as was absolutely possible.
You keep saying these things, that WoTC sees their customers as barriers, that they are desperate for control, and yet you lack proof,
The single best part of this is what comes after. I mean, maybe this is meant to be facetious on your part, but it really doesn't read like it
beyond gesturing widely to everything they have ever done
"You have no proof...except for everything they've ever done!" Not the strongest argument there.
(except the parts that show they don't do or think those things)
And exactly what parts do you think that is? Because so far you've only pointed to marketing-approved public statements and them sending products a month early to an influencer who's not completely beholden to them.
and saying "But see! The Pinkertons that one time for Magic the Gathering! and Undermonetization!"
Among many, many other things, yes. The real question is why so many people insist on looking past those.
Yet every major creator they have worked with, has been critical of them and their actions.
You left out the important context about how that was during the OGL crisis. I'm not sure why your criteria is "cutting off anyone who ever said a bad word about them," but that's not the standard.
And they still work with them.
See above. Not even WotC can defend their OGL debacle, so they had to walk that one back.
And that means nothing to you, because you are convinced that they are evil.
Because it was their own actions that convinced me of that. You seem to think that because they lost the OGL fight, and made conciliatory gestures, that means all is forgiven. The real question is why.
Ah yes, the completely free character sheets, how could I forget them making money off of them.
You're the one who brought them up in the first place, and now you're saying they're not relevant?
I never denied that they would be capable of using both, just that it wouldn't be required to get the VTT to continue using DDB
Which is an absolutist position, again, since now you're talking about things being required instead of what's being incentivized. That's a mindset that's not conducive to anything we're talking about, since there's no aspect of this which is a measure of "forcing" or "requiring" anyone to do anything. The entire point revolves around some things being made more enticing, which distracts from things which are not so enticed.
No it isn't.
You don't think the window to buy RvB from Rooster Teeth is closing quickly?
So if I understand correctly - we’re concerned that a WotC vtt, which no one has seen yet and we really have no idea what the final form will be, will somehow impact creative play despite the fact that no other vtt in the past twenty years has done so. We have no evidence to back up this assertion and no actual reason to be concerned other than the fact that WotC is producing this vtt.

Is that about right?
Wait, so now you're literally asking me to summarize the last few pages of the thread for you, even though it's not only right there for you to peruse but you've even been posting in it this entire time, and yet haven't bothered to actually read what's been posted? As in, the text there has already been passing in front of your eyes, yet you haven't actually taken any of it in? Because literally every single thing you've said here, every incorrect assumption, misstatement, and fallacy, has already been brought up and addressed.

No, what you've said isn't right. It's a Billy Madison quote waiting to happen.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top