Continuing the D&D executive producer's interview tour, gaming influencer Ginny Di asks a WotC's Kyle Brink about the OGL and other things.
Last edited by a moderator:
The profit and revenue mainly comes from MtG. Top end estimate is that D&D made $150M of more than $1B of revenue and that is very recent.D&D is tiny? When WOTC is literally half of Hasbro profit I don’t think D&D is tiny.
they can do that without nuking the OGL too. Do not license 1DD to the existing VTTs and let the 5e licenses expire, done.They may have the big name, but they want to assure complete dominance, and that is absolutely not assured given their monetization plans.
Rather, nuking the VTT market so that people don't have other places to go for their product makes their release far safer, especially if (like most big tech projects) they run into technical hurdles initially. This way people have to use their system because there simply aren't other options.
This is a very good point, and IMO somewhat lends credence to the idea that they were worried more about implementations in future technology than specifically trying to cripple the current major VTTs. (With the caveat that there were almost certainly people within WotC that would have been happy with the effect a new OGL and VTT policy would have on those as well.)they can do that without nuking the OGL too. Do not license 1DD to the existing VTTs and let the 5e licenses expire, done.
Without the subclasses (not in the SRD) and official adventures, the other VTTs are effectively removed from the D&D market.
They do not use the SRD today, so changes to the OGL for this are not helpful / needed.
Brinks has over 25 years in the games publishing industry. As you continually beat on him for lying you aren't doing basic fact checking of yourself.Kyle is not really from the publishing industry and D&D is tiny in Hasbro. So I have doubts that they have publishing centric lawyers and that he knows what is “usual”.
I marked that down as a probable lie.
Cannot be proven, of course. But rings false.
Anyone who believes WotC's concern was genuinely about 'toxic OGL content', now or in the future, there's several bridges I'd like to interest you in.
Anyone who believes WotC's concern was genuinely about 'toxic OGL content', now or in the future, there's several bridges I'd like to interest you in.
Sure, but should we really believe that?
The idea of Meta suddenly making a D&D VTT clone when they can barely make office call software comes off more as a deflection against a company nobody likes
Computer game publishing is not D&D. D&D is book publishing. All of the 3rd party companies they were talking to are also book publishers.Brinks has over 25 years in the games publishing industry. As you continually beat on him for lying you aren't doing basic fact checking of yourself.
He must likely does know the way publishing works, in video games, which may be different than books, but that doesn't make one a liar
they can do that without nuking the OGL too. Do not license 1DD to the existing VTTs and let the 5e licenses expire, done.
Without the subclasses (not in the SRD) and official adventures, the other VTTs are effectively removed from the D&D market.
They do not use the SRD today, so changes to the OGL for this are not helpful / needed.
I genuinely have a problem with the idea that it is just corporate greed. I guess there were a whole lot of reasons why some people at WotC thought it might be a good idea. The core was certainly to protect their recent and future investment...
... and then they did everything wrong.
Please demonstrate to me where WotC was acting with such intelligence that this is an implausible scenario.
For one thing, WotC hasn't exactly demonstrated that they really understand technology.
For another thing, there's no reason to think that this was about fear of sudden changes.
One of the major VTT (Foundry) does not have a license with them but there are tools to scrape all the materials from D&D Beyond.they can do that without nuking the OGL too. Do not license 1DD to the existing VTTs and let the 5e licenses expire, done.
Without the subclasses (not in the SRD) and official adventures, the other VTTs are effectively removed from the D&D market.
They do not use the SRD today, so changes to the OGL for this are not helpful / needed.
that sounds like a technical gap WotC can fix, not a legal right VTTs have. If WotC went through the trouble of not renewing licenses, this way would get closed as well.You don't need to license it over to other VTTs to have that happen. Foundry has no license for D&D but you can still strip DNDBeyond of the info through it.
I can always cut and paste. I routinely enter data into Fantasy Grounds and I have been buying D&D Beyond books since it first started (as of now they lost my paper and D&D Beyond Heist books purchase but I will buy on FG to future proof in case the license is not renewed next year).that sounds like a technical gap WotC can fix, not a legal right VTTs have
there being a way now is not the same as WotC guaranteeing this will continue to be available. If they went so far as to not renew licenses, you can safely assume they would not allow for this to continue either.One of the major VTT (Foundry) does not have a license with them but there are tools to scrape all the materials from D&D Beyond.
So? Nothing WotC can do about that, with the OGL or withoutAll the major VTT also support other RPG.
this is at most collateral damage, not the goal. 1.0a products could continue to be sold, 1.1 were only affected past a threshold, 1.2 were not affected at all again.The gun that was aimed at all not WoTC was not the VTT stuff, it was aimed at Drivethru in terms of potentially ordering them to cease selling OGL products if the OGL was deauthorized.
If they fear losing money that way, then they can simply renew the licenses.WoTC can still shut off their partner VTT from One D&D books and that will be a revenue blow to them, probably a pretty big one. But it will be a blow to WoTC as they then need their VTT to make up that revenue.
I am amazed they allow it at all since they have licensed VTT partners. The fact that the have not licensed Foundry points to me as a reason to believe they want to further restrict access in the future.there being a way now is not the same as WotC guaranteeing this will continue to be available. If they went so far as to not renew licenses, you can safely assume they would not allow for this to continue either.
I am pretty sure this is why the survey was cut shortI also remain convinced that the interviews are part of the process to protect their most important asset - the Movie.
We are all celebrating our victory and in some ways I think the PR campaign looks more like a Hollywood crisis expert was brought in.
not sure why Foundry does not have a license, maybe because they can get away with this. Closing this hole is a ‘Foundry is using our stuff without a license’ problem, not a ‘we want to shut down all VTTs’ oneI am amazed they allow it at all since they have licensed VTT partners. The fact that the have not licensed Foundry points to me as a reason to believe they want to further restrict access in the future.
that sounds like a technical gap WotC can fix, not a legal right VTTs have. If WotC went through the trouble of not renewing licenses, this way would get closed as well.