Whizbang Dustyboots
100% that gnome
Came here to say this. The answer to "is _____ playing 4D chess" is always, "no, they're doing exactly what they appear to be doing, even if it seems stupid."
Last edited:
Is WotC playing 4d Chess with the 5.1 SRD CC?
- Thread starter Burt Baccara
- Start date
Glass Onion, by the way, is a great film.
Yeah, well, that's what the 3pp community is, now isn't it? You don't wait until someone makes your perfect mix - you pick it yourself.
Except my favorite flavor isn't available and the formula is a trade secret grumble grumble
Henadic Theologian
Hero
Accusing WotC of playing 4d chess gives them too much credit.
delericho
Legend
While there are undoubtedly multiple factions, I'm not sure any of them are doing particularly great. Even this move to the CC license seems ill thought through - I find it hard to believe they would have released Strahd into the wild if they'd thought it through properly.
Ashtagon
Adventurer
CC has some limitations relative to 1.0a in terms of how to use it conveniently for 3PPs. The OGL integrated a mechanism in which content was almost automatically re-licenced for use by other 3PPs, whereas CC requires the material to be re-licenced out to be noted in a separate document; it's effectively an extra step.
For pity's sake - it isn't like we gave them any TIME to think it through, now did we? We put them under time pressure, and then we complain that they didn't take time to think things through?
I guess there's no pleasing some people.
They didn't "release Strahd into the wild". The let his name be used, but no lore or stats. So, for example, if you talk about "Strahd the vampire," you are on thin ice. Fat lot of good that does anyone.
Sometimes, you have to buy your own darned Moxie.
glass
(he, him)
That's not a great example, because the SRD literally says "the vampire Strahd von Zarovich". Overall point still stands though!
delericho
Legend
Who's complaining? I'm just noting that it was probably a mistake.
I am not so sure it was.
As I've already noted, the name alone isn't particularly valuable.
From there, whether it is a mistake depends on the goals of the person taking the action, and the repercussions of that action. Can we even claim to know either at this point?
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
With all of the references to the New Coke debacle, I'm remembering a statement from Donald Keough about the conspiracy theory that Coke came out with a new formula in order to spark a backlash that would enable them to revitalize the brand and spike sales (playing 4D chess, in other words): "We're not that dumb, and we're not that smart."
Hey, at least Moxie is still being sold.
Could you imagine the risk of actually playing 4d chess as a company like that? "Oh we're going to intentionally tank our brand so that we can turn around and look like heroes so it will make our brand even stronger" is a ridiculous risk to take.
(I mean, there was a lot of cocaine in the 80s so you can't completely rule it out, but still...)
wingsandsword
Legend
Also, part of the problem with New Coke was the test methodology was fatally flawed.
They entirely used "sip" tests. Have testers take a sip of this beverage. Now have them take a sip of this beverage. Which do you prefer?
People don't drink soda by the little sip. They usually drink it by the glass or cup full. The taste experience apparently was very different. What people might like in a controlled test, having a small sip of didn't work out as well when someone went to get a big glass of it in the kitchen, or a cup of it at a fast food place, or opened a can of it to chug.
They tested old coke vs. new coke in one very specific test, and didn't realize that didn't extend to other use cases, like typical soda consumption.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
It was! Not as good as the first one, but still very good.
wingsandsword
Legend
Actually, the fact that Strahd is a vampire is part of the CC release.
It was released as part of the Divine Sense paladin ability, in its description.
The relevant sentence is:
So yeah, you should be fine under the CC release to refer to Strahd as a vampire, or use the full name "Count Strahd von Zarovich".
. . .that he's the Dark Lord of Barovia, who rules from Castle Ravenloft in the Demiplane of Dread. . .with an obsession over his lost love Tatyana. . .those things are a definite no-go.
It sure does look like you can make your own generic Dracula-knockoff be called "Count Strahd von Zarovich" though.
I haven't ever seen a review of the methodologies used, so I cannot speak to that.
It seems fair to mention two (and a half) things:
1) With respect, I have rarely seen anyone drink, say, and entire 12 oz can of soda in one long pull. They take a swallow or two, and put the can back down, so while it may turn out to be a flawed methodology, it seems a reasonable guess. One usually learns of failed testing methodologies when the testing fails to accurately test - learning how to test is trial and error.
1a) I know there's issues with comparison tests if you don't do the comparison immediately. You aren't going to get a reliable comparison if you expect the tester to have to go through two cans of soda before giving you a response.
2) I'm sorry, but you don't get accusations that the formula change was a "communist plot" out of using a sip test over some other testing protocol.
Similar Threads
