Ginny Di interviews WotC's Kyle Brink

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.

​

 

[Umbran]

Brink: Were looking at it... We need to make sure we don't release things we don't intend or that aren't necessary for playing 3.0 or 3.5...

 Me:
View attachment 275189

The SRD documents for 3.x already exist. Releasing them is a process of review, and excising some references they don't want in CC. Easy-peasy, lemon-squeezy, and a sort of nod to how they don't intend to screw over those who have been working for decades with the 3e base.

There is no such document for 4e, because they didn't use an open license. Producing an SRD would be a significant project, with questionable return to them for doing that work, since the 3pp presence in 4e is small.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

As far as the 3D vtt goes Kyle says

“Creating for the 3D space can get complicated” home brew “will require more work” and “work in our part”

So yea, not for me, probably.

I feel the same, however if they offer complete packages for their adventures, I could see doing it. Being able to make a one-time purchase to be able to just run, say, Phandelver over VTT would be a good way for a lot of us to get a free taste without the hassle of an ongoing subscription or having to find yet more time to build VTT sets and encounters for a game.

 

[dave2008]

Right now I'm trying to determine if I should watch this, if I can be swayed into trusting them.
I'm thinking not, unless I hear there are some big revelations.

This is one is short (23 min) and half of it is her commentary. Not really a lot of Kyle, but her commentary is good.

 

[mamba]

But they did for the SRD 5.1.

Granted they were in panic at the time.

the difference is that there is no 4e SRD (to speak of), the 5e one exists

 

[mamba]

Please note that previously he said his instinct is to just do it.

But yea.

It still might be his instinct, it is not his decision

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think that's going to be a thing that Wizards is going to discover. The more complex their VTT offering is, the harder it is to homebrew, the smaller the audience they're going to have for it. The more expensive it is for 3pp to sell things on it, the smaller the audience they're going to have for it.

Mario Maker is amazing... I can make my own levels of a Super Mario Game within some bounds...

Hacking Super mario world gives you 1,000x more options and ways to customize.

Hacking Super mario world has never seemed to me (in what I have seen) come close to making a D&D setting from scratch.

But I run into this on Roll20 too. I have a player who pitched a warlock who's mother may or may not be a goddess of the moon... he asked if I could make a fun little critter for him to have as a familair... and I came up with the funny idea of a green anthropomorphic rat (still rat sized) that looked like he was smoking a cigar made of green cheese... needless to say all searches online have failed to find me art to use

 

[mamba]

I was more keying I'm on the fact that the question was about previous editions in general and he answered specifically about 3.x.

i.e. the only other ones that have an SRD..

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Already exists. Just can't share it here bc piracy.

yeah, so if it became CC, you could

 

[mamba]

From what I can tell, the 3.0 and 3.5 SRDs are far and away more IP-free than the 5.1 SRD was.

really? I had the opposite impression, not that I checked the 3e ones, simply based on the discussions here they seem far more complete

 

[mamba]

...immediately followed by him saying hombrewing in 3d is complicated and time consuming and will require purchased assets. So it will supported in a "you can certainly try" sort of way. Which is fine, people can just not use the vtt, but the contrast was funny to me

1) that is obviously true, we knew that already 2) the 3d VTT is not required to play D&D