How long do we wait for WoTC to speak?


log in or register to remove this ad



Maybe they don't want anyone to see it? :unsure:
Basically this.

It's a bad sign.

There are two approaches at this stage:

1) Minimize the story as much as possible, with as few concessions as possible (maybe none).

2) Issue a loud and clear "MEA CULPA!" and "WE HEAR YOU!" with a real climbdown.

If it was 2, you would expect a big pre-scheduled event with them saying exactly what they were doing and when to maximize the LOUDNESS of the "Oh WotC cracked, I guess they're ok after all!" response.
 

"Wizards of the Coast believes strongly in Open Gaming, but we also believe the OGL must change to meet new challenges that have arisen in the two decades since it was drafted. However, we are strongly committed to the D&D community, and based on the feedback we have received, we believe we've made some mistakes and we're deeply sorry for the hurt and anxiety this has caused to our partners and our fans. That's why we're going to take some time to reassess our way forward. Look for more information in the coming months once we've done some soul-searching and landed on a path that will work for everyone who is a valued part of our vibrant D&D community."

Sit back, let the furor burn itself out, wait for the large 3PPs to clear themselves out and commit resources to their heartbreakers. Make damn sure OneD&D is awesome and brings the vast majority of the fans along. There is no strategy without risk, at this point, but I think they'd be crazy not to take this kind of approach. If they do, I don't think we should be sitting on the edge of our seats for their statement.
 

My current guess is: No formal announcement except “The OGL will stay intact.” Then 6e is published under a GSL-like, WotC cuts bait on 5e SRD/OGL content, and tries to woo publishers to 6e with VTT and sweetheart deals.

Edit: wrote my comment as Greg was posting. I agree that they will do almost exactly that, they don’t need to kill OGL 1.0a to try this strategy. A legal fight against a small OGL user would be terrible PR again — why bother looking evil when softer strategies have the same result?
 


Folks ought to be aware of the likelihood that, in certain situations, media outlets (large and small) may be funded with a kickback (or other bennies) in order to serve as a pro-corporate voice.
To be honest I doubt that either one was the result of a monetary or similar kickback.

What's much more common is that someone involved is really a hyperfan and/or has family/friends who work at the subject of the fannish behaviour. With OA, I'd think it was much more likely they have a friend or family member who is senior at WotC, or they themselves are slavish WotC fans. Or they might just be jerks trying to score maximum controversy clickbait from some nerds. The fact that they're telling people to take their pitchforks to individual journalists, and generally trying focus hate/anger on a single journalist (who was by no means the first person to say any of that - just the first in a major news thing) really suggests they're basically trolling for clicks and patreon subs.
 

The Opening Arguments podcast will devote their episode to the OGL story this Friday.

OA’s Twitter indicates they are absolutely not on the side of open gaming.

Seriously: they think WotC is perfectly within their rights to change the license. They think WotC always intended to be able to change the license however they wanted. They think OGL 1.1 is no big deal—they even imply it’s better because it’s “kind of insane” that WotC doesn’t already get a cut of Pathfinder. And at worst, OA claims, “if you’re a niche commercial creator, you will probably have to talk to WotC.” This is all a “moral panic” based on (among other things) “bad contract-reading.” The Gizmodo article is “virtually fact-free” and filled with deliberately misleading “fearmongering”; fans should turn their pitchforks on the article’s author.

They are, in my humble opinion, full of naughty word, and frankly it wouldn’t be the first time. (I have listened in the past and am the opposite of a fan.) At the very least, they haven’t bothered asking anyone how the TTRPG industry works or what’s really at stake (Niche creators just have to talk to WotC, what’s the big deal? is one of the worst takes on this I’ve seen yet).

But they reach a lot of people and have the power to shift the momentum back toward WotC’s side. If WotC is stalling, this is exactly the kind of thing they would be waiting for.
Folks ought to be aware of the likelihood that, in certain situations, media outlets (large and small)--and forum posters--may be funded with a kickback (or other bennies) in order to serve as a pro-corporate voice.

I remember back in 2000, when the first D&D Movie came out, there was this 'D&D Movie fan site' with suspiciously slick graphics. Whose admin who was very 'active' on the WOTC Message Boards at the time.

His (Their?) key phrase was something like: "Don't judge the movie until you've seen it at least once! (And bring friends!)" This 'avid' fan posted this nice-sounding response to any critical reviews on the Message Board.

Which sounds rational enough; but of course, seeing the movie "just once", times however many thousands of WOTC Msg Board members = that much more $$$. For wasting time seeing an almost entirely worthless (or less than worthless, D&D brand-tarnishing) sh*te of a movie.

My sense was that it was the film company (rather than WotC) who was sponsoring this very ‘avid’ fan. (This was pre-Hasbro WotC, whose execs, such as Ryan Dancey and Jim Butler, had class back then.)

Of course in the present day, there are more outlets besides message boards. Funding would be done in a way which could hardly be 'proven.'

Yet I suggest that folks (especially forum moderators) be canny to that kind of tenor. People are free to voice their opinion, but keep an eye out for especially incisive intrusions.

In certain echelons of business, things can get pretty cold and serious. There are literally 100s of millions of dollars at stake here.
 

Reynard

Legend
Folks ought to be aware of the likelihood that, in certain situations, media outlets (large and small)--and forum posters--may be funded with a kickback (or other bennies) in order to serve as a pro-corporate voice.

I remember back in 2000, when the first D&D Movie came out, there was this 'D&D Movie fan site' with suspiciously slick graphics. Whose admin who was very 'active' on the WOTC Message Boards at the time.

His (Their?) key phrase was something like: "Don't judge the movie until you've seen it at least once! (And bring friends!)" This 'avid' fan posted this nice-sounding response to any critical reviews on the Message Board.

Which sounds rational enough; but of course, seeing the movie "just once", times however many thousands of WOTC Msg Board members = that much more $$$. For an almost entirely worthless (or less than worthless) sh*te of a movie.

My sense was that it was the film company (rather than WotC) who was sponsoring this very ‘avid’ fan. (This was pre-Hasbro WotC, whose execs, such as Ryan Dancey and Jim Butler, had class back then.)

Of course in the present day, there are more outlets besides message boards. Funding would be done in a way which could hardly be 'proven.'

Yet I suggest that folks (especially forum moderators) be canny to that kind of tenor. People are free to voice their opinion, but keep an eye out for especially incisive intrusions.

In certain echelons of business, things can get pretty cold and serious. There are literally 100s of millions of dollars at stake here.
repeat post? or time travel?
 

So what do folks think they will say this afternoon?
Most likely?

"I'm sorry you guys listened to Evil Leakers and Misleading Journalists, how terrible. The OGL 1.1 is your friend! We're just trying to help and take a tiny bit of what we're owed! Oh and 1.0a isn't being deauthorized, hahaha why would you think that? It's just opt-in!"

And a bunch of softball questions nobody asked about other aspects of the OGL 1.1 spun to make them sound as good as possible.
 



Most likely?

"I'm sorry you guys listened to Evil Leakers and Misleading Journalists, how terrible. The OGL 1.1 is your friend! We're just trying to help and take a tiny bit of what we're owed! Oh and 1.0a isn't being deauthorized, hahaha why would you think that? It's just opt-in!"

And a bunch of softball questions nobody asked about other aspects of the OGL 1.1 spun to make them sound as good as possible.
If it's going to be a video rather than text, this opens up the real possibility that it won't be aimed at the 3PP industry or its outraged supporters at all.

It could very well just be a video explaining what OGL 1.1 does, why it's a good thing, etc., all pitched at people who haven't yet heard about it—and more or less ignoring those of us who have.

If they've decided to stick to their plan, this might be (from their point of view) the best option at this point. Remember, this is all about their vision for a transformed business model for the game. If they don't have a new vision yet, they'll stick to the old one.

We'll know soon enough.
 


Dausuul

Legend
Aside from that one zero-calorie tweet, they have been dead silent for a full week since Linda Condega dropped the bomb (which happened on January 5th). It doesn't take that long to put together a statement if all you intend to do is blow smoke, deflect attention, and carry on as before.

There has to be a policy change in the works, probably including a hasty rewrite of the License From Hell.
 

To be honest I doubt that either one was the result of a monetary or similar kickback.

What's much more common is that someone involved is really a hyperfan and/or has family/friends who work at the subject of the fannish behaviour. With OA, I'd think it was much more likely they have a friend or family member who is senior at WotC, or they themselves are slavish WotC fans. Or they might just be jerks trying to score maximum controversy clickbait from some nerds. The fact that they're telling people to take their pitchforks to individual journalists, and generally trying focus hate/anger on a single journalist (who was by no means the first person to say any of that - just the first in a major news thing) really suggests they're basically trolling for clicks and patreon subs.
You might be right, but at this sensitive, pivotal time, I think the possibility of underhanded influence in social media is just something to be aware of, especially for forum administrators.

[Edit: And also incisively distracting posts, especially when the OP is calling for action. (e.g. inane ‘don’t worry be happy’ LOL.)]
 
Last edited:

CapnZapp

Legend
"Wizards of the Coast believes strongly in Open Gaming, but we also believe the OGL must change to meet new challenges that have arisen in the two decades since it was drafted. However, we are strongly committed to the D&D community, and based on the feedback we have received, we believe we've made some mistakes and we're deeply sorry for the hurt and anxiety this has caused to our partners and our fans. That's why we're going to take some time to reassess our way forward. Look for more information in the coming months once we've done some soul-searching and landed on a path that will work for everyone who is a valued part of our vibrant D&D community."

Sit back, let the furor burn itself out, wait for the large 3PPs to clear themselves out and commit resources to their heartbreakers. Make damn sure OneD&D is awesome and brings the vast majority of the fans along. There is no strategy without risk, at this point, but I think they'd be crazy not to take this kind of approach. If they do, I don't think we should be sitting on the edge of our seats for their statement.
Did you also once think Pathfinder 1 was a "heartbreaker"?

Because they can't undo the damage, the complete and total loss of trust.

And your attempt (not sure how much is repurposed WotC-speak and how much is your own words) is weak - as soon as people read "we also believe the OGL must change" that will basically confirm WotC has zero intention of even trying.

Remember, the leaked OGL 1.1, that is the opposite of an open license, has made it extremely clear that when WotC says "Wizards of the Coast believes strongly in Open Gaming" that's a bald-faced lie.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
My current guess is: No formal announcement except “The OGL will stay intact.” Then 6e is published under a GSL-like, WotC cuts bait on 5e SRD/OGL content, and tries to woo publishers to 6e with VTT and sweetheart deals.

Edit: wrote my comment as Greg was posting. I agree that they will do almost exactly that, they don’t need to kill OGL 1.0a to try this strategy. A legal fight against a small OGL user would be terrible PR again — why bother looking evil when softer strategies have the same result?
Correction: they didn't need to kill OGL 1.0a. Now they already have.

Your strategy would have been sound back in (November? December? before any of this was known)

Now everybody is convinced there is zero future in D&D 3rd party publishing. And there is just about enough time to write and publish a D&D competitor game before D&D 6e's release in early Fall 2024.
 


Epic Threats

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top