Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 7725080" data-attributes="member: 2525">No really, it's not. Dialect is not a Hasbro company in any way. They are a complete other company, a third party. If all this is, is a license to Dialect, then it's not WOTC "doing" anything other than giving them a license.I also think you have some misconceptions about how Hasbro works with regard to WOTC, and how WOTC works with regard to the D&D division. Hasbro makes no internal decisions for WOTC beyond a budget, and some extreme high level things like the movies. WOTC makes only the highest level decisions for the D&D division, like sharing some accounting and HR people. For the most part, the D&D division of WOTC makes their own decisions on how to apply their budget, and they are almost entirely free of any direct Hasbro intervention. There is no stockholder issue in play - neither the D&D division nor WOTC have their own stock, and D&D has literally only made it into the stockholders quarterly report I think twice at this point. There is no stockholder influence on the internal workings of the D&D division...they are WAY WAY WAY too small for any of that. They are a rounding error for Hasbro.As for confusion over their digital products, I am not sure what the confusion is. They've licensed to some other companies, mostly digital table tops. They've licensed to an Amazon company, which is mostly a character sheet and rules look-up service. And now they are possibly licensing or possibly issuing their own Kindle-like app. Nobody here seemed confused by any of that. What's the confusion?[Edit - I see while I was typing you said it was confusion over you not understanding why they are doing it this way. To which I say...so? They've said many times why they didn't go with PDFs and nobody seems to accept what they said (it was a retail request). So who cares if you don't understand why they are doing it this way? They've been incredibly successful so far with this edition. You have no experience doing what they've so far been very successful doing. Why can't you just trust that they might know what they are doing without them doing it the way you'd have done it?]</blockquote>

Verification