WotC How much does Hasbro / WotC impact your feelings towards D&D?

[Velderan]

How familiar are you with thesis of Chockepoint Capitalism, as presented by writers Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow?

I wasn’t and briefly skimmed over what I could find on a Google search so I think I get the gist. I would agree there is cause for concern when the terms of putting a 3pp on DDB requires Kobold Press to remove the product from their own store and discontinue selling PDFs. Until then there is just too many viable ways to play even if DDB and Sigil end up dominant.

 

[TheSword]

It also depends on whether there is a benefit to the creatives marketing through Sigil that they wouldn’t otherwise get. CPC is about using the control to leverage unfair advantage. If the advantage isn’t unfair - it benefits both sides - it isn’t a chokepoint.

Many that use the DMs Guild would argue that access to the IP and the additional publicity is worth the cost. I suspect folks will feel similarly about Sigil and Beyond.

 

[mamba]

Some segment of OSR gamers on Twitter are grousing about how the Heroes Feast Spell in the PHB has tacos and sushi (but North American pumpkins are "normal food" so we know what they mean). They are claiming thst the artists involved "hate D&D and fantasy".

ha, YT suggested a video to me by a channel called Diversity & Dragons and that was railing against the 'woke' art. Found the channel name ironic

 

[Remathilis]

Having just listened to what eBay did to a couple of bloggers, WotC are practically choir boys.

 

[mamba]

That's literally what the OGL fiasco was: a massive downgrade of the D&D experience for an unhinged cash grab.

but not out of spite for their customers... the goal was very different from 'we should screw our customers over since we hate them so much'

They were forced to backtrack, but there's the rub: it was only because their customers howled with outrage -- or more likely, the massive wave of unsubscriptions that followed -- that they retreated.

pretty sure they could have sat that one out if they really had wanted to

And yes, it was a bad strategy. A customer-centric business wouldn't have pushed that nonsense in the first place.

agreed, it was a bad strategy, the legality was at best very questionable (I assume they would have lost in court) and it created backlash from both 3pps and customers, both of which are keeping D&D in the top spot, and all of that for some questionable gain and outright paranoia

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Has no one noticed that the job description sounds like this game designer is being brought on to….design a new game?

It also sounds like a pretty big job so it’s likely they already had a candidate in mind. While they should hire Snarf it doesn’t seem like you would bring on an unknown entity for that job description.

We were in negotiations, but then my candidacy was scuttled by the environmental concerns of the number of trees that would be killed* to print so... many... words.


*I tried to sell them on the idea of parchment made from the skin of bards, but I need to work on that technology.

 

[KYRON45]

We were in negotiations, but then my candidacy was scuttled by the environmental concerns of the number of trees that would be killed* to print so... many... words.


*I tried to sell them on the idea of parchment made from the skin of bards, but I need to work on that technology.

Does this now qualify as the "Snarf Debacle?" Or maybe Snarf Gate?

 

[Maxperson]

Define cool.

 

[TheSword]

They do.


I was presenting very shortened and simplified version of a full argument for simplicity, I do not care about making me an example of something without asking for clarification first.


The physical media cannot be a chokepoint. WotC is currently trying to turn D&DBeyond into a CHokepoint - hence their attempt that making it a marketplace where you can buy both main and third party content, but also testing place where you can rate playtest material and a place where you have access to your sheet, books AND new VTT software. Hence why the only thing to scare them during OGL debacle was people massively leaving D&DBeyond. Even their latest behavior is consistent with the actions of established chokepoint - albeit fired prematurely. It's all building towards make D&DBeyond a necessary tool for interacting with the game, which is why it is pushed as such default even in their own adds they show people putting away books and dice while at one table, to use D&DBeyond instead. Once they control the means through which us, the customers, interact with the producers of goods (MCDM, Kobold Press, Ghostfire Gaming), they can do things like force changes into which books you are using (hence why attempt to replace old spells with new was "firing prematurely" - they haven't yet caught enough fish into the net to comfortably pull such trick), ramp up the prices, start taking bigger cuts from 3rd party book sales etc. They won't have a monopoly (DriveThruRpg is already a similiar chokepoint, but even then WotC has their hand in that one through DMs Guild, ditto for Paradox and Storyteller's Vault and Paizo and Pathfinder Infinite). This thing is very deliberately built to control the way you play and ensure it is done in a way that allows WotC to squeze every last drop of blood from you.

Genuinely interested in your view on this.

Firstly, where do you see the exploitative practice? How are consumers suffering, and how are suppliers suffering? Or is this something you just think is likely in the future. Because it sounds like you’re criticising them for making a platform. That in itself is providing a service for suppliers and customers.

Secondly. What makes you think D&D beyond is going to be the only way for suppliers to engage with customers? Because I’ve been playing D&D online since the pandemic and only engaged with Beyond to check the playtest materials for free, and to look up spells on my mobile because I like the format on Beyond. Everything else I do through competitors of beyond.

 

[Maxperson]

Which IMO should be zero for either of them. They have both made mistakes and addressed them, like most companies that want to remain in business tend to do.

I would really be interested in how many people who answered a 5 in this poll give anywhere near the same scrutiny to every single company they buy stuff from. That sounds exhausting.

It seems like people in this thread are conflating 1s and 5s in the poll with will purchase or won't purchase. The poll doesn't connect those things. It only asks if what WotC has done has impacted our feelings towards the game.

I answered with a 1, because I love D&D and nothing WotC can do will change that. That doesn't mean I will buy their D&D products. The OGL fiasco put me off and then they took a big step towards mending things. After that they have repeatedly engaged in other missteps, albeit fairly minor ones. That shows me, though, that they really haven't changed.

Even if I liked 5.5e enough to buy it, and I don't, I wouldn't buy until WotC showed(and I understand that they don't have to and never will) me that they have changed.

As for giving other companies the same level of scrutiny? 100% If people bring stuff like the OGL(or worse in the case of child labor, etc.) to my attention, I'll stop buying their stuff as well. What I won't do, and didn't do with WotC, is do research into a company to see if they've done bad things. I don't have the time or inclination to research every company I deal with. Especially since many products involve multiple companies, because products are often made from parts produced by several other companies.