Kyle Brink (D&D Exec Producer) On OGL Controversy & One D&D (Summary)

The YouTube channel 3 Black Halflings spoke to WotC's Kyle Brink (executive producer, D&D) about the recent Open Game License events, amongst other things. It's an hour-plus long interview (which you can watch below) but here are some of the highlights of what Brink said. Note these are my paraphrases, so I encourage you to listen to the actual interview for full context if you have time.

OGL v1.1 Events

• There was a concern that the OGL allowed Facebook to make a D&D Metaverse without WotC involvement.
• Re. the OGL decisions, WotC had gotten themselves into a 'terrible place' and are grateful for the feedback that allowed them to see that.
• The royalties in OGL v1.1 were there as a giant deterrent to mega corporations.
• Kyle Brink is not familiar with what happened in the private meetings with certain publishers in December, although was aware that meetings were taking place.
• When the OGL v1.1 document became public, WotC had already abandoned much of it.
• The response from WotC coinciding with D&D Beyond subscription cancellations was a coincidence as it takes longer than that to modify a legal document.
• The atmosphere in WotC during the delay before making an announcement after the OGL v1.1 went public was 'bad' -- fear of making it worse if they said anything. The feeling was that they should not talk, just deliver the new version.
• Brink does not know who wrote the unpopular 'you won but we won too' announcement and saw it the same time we did. He was not happy with it.
• 'Draft' contracts can have dates and boxes for signatures. Despite the leaked version going to some publishers, it was not final or published.
• There were dissenting voices within WotC regarding the OGL v1.1, but once the company had agreed how to proceed, everybody did the best they could to deliver.
• The dissenting voices were not given enough weight to effect change. Brinks' team is now involved in the process and can influence decisions.
• The SRD release into Creative Commmons is a one-way door; there can be no takeback.

One D&D

• The intention is that all of the new [One D&D] updates they are doing, "the SRD will be updated to remain compatible with all of that". This might be with updted rules or with bridging language like 'change the word race to species'.
• Anything built with the current SRD will be 100% compatible with the new rules.
• Brink does not think there is a plan to, and does not see the value, in creating a new OGL just for One D&D. When/if they put more stuff into the public space, they'd do it through Creative Commons.
• WotC doesn't think of One D&D as a new edition. He feels it's more like what happened with 3.5. They think 5E is great, but coud be better and play faster and easier with more room for roleplay, so there is stuff they can do to improve it but not replace it.

Inclusivity

• WotC is leaning on the community to discourage bad actors and hateful content, rather than counting on a legal document.
• They are working on an adaptable content policy describing what they consider to be hateful content which will apply to WotC's work (no legal structure to apply it to anybody else).
• They now have external inclusivity reviewers (as of last fall) who look over every word and report back. They are putting old content through the same process before reprints.
• Previously cultural consultances were used for spot reviews on things they thought might be problematic, but not everything (e.g. Hadozee).
• The problematic Hadozee content was written by a trusted senior person at WotC, and very few people saw it before publication.
• 'DnDShorts' video on the internal workings and management culture of WotC is not something Brinks can talk on, but it is not reflective of his team. Each team has its own culture.
• In the last couple of years the D&D team hiring process has made the team more inclusive.
• When asked about non white-CIS-men in leadership positions at WotC, Brinks referred to some designers and authors. He said 'guys like me, we're leaving the workforce, to be blunt' and 'I'm not the face of the hobby any more'. It is important that the creators at WotC look like the players. 'Guys like me can't leave soon enough'.

Virtual Tabletops (VTTs)/Digital Gaming

• Goal is to make more ways to play ('and' not 'instead') including a cool looking 3D space.
• Digital gaming is not meant to replace books etc., but to be additive.
• The strategy is to give players a choice, and WotC will go where the player interests lie.

​

 

[billd91]

Where did he say anything about hiring people without experience? I love the privilege espoused by those in a favored position in deciding how and when those not should be given equality...

There's a famous Playboy interview with John Wayne...

 

[Sacrosanct]

they said they are not playing because the art is so diverse, they do not feel themselves represented enough. The art 40 years ago was diverse enough…

Yeah, this. They started off with saying you didn't need diverse representation in D&D because you could always play a different race or gender. Then followed that up with how they won't play this game because there aren't enough white males in the art (there are actually quite a few, but unless a white male is front and center as the focus, then he doesn't feel like he's being represented). Notice the flaw in his logic, and contradiction with his first statement?

 

[Retreater]

I never said I was sticking with the brand or more importantly WotC/Hasbro. Dungeons and Dragons, to me, has always been more than the company that owns it. And it was that way from the very beginning. I don't see much difference between the founders, the current stewards, and everyone in-between.

The world of D&D, and specifically 5e, is much more than what WotC offers or controls. I don't support companies, I support designers, artists, and products. There is a line, but I generally but what I want independent of who makes it.

I'm not saying that the way I see it is the right/only way. In fact, I likely have a minority opinion. But "for me" - purchasing things with the ampersand logo, encouraging newer players to purchase the books, even down to watching the upcoming movie - those things just leave a sour taste in my mouth. It's all a lifestyle brand, so everything is connected now.
I feel like I've been had. I feel like I've been championing a hobby that is nothing more than some rich executive's bottom line. It's not a club of nerds and outcasts, artisans and fans - it's a handful of people actively taking advantage of me, laughing their way to the bank.
To me, I'm having a hard time seeing "designers and artists" at WotC. Everything I can see is mass-produced, heartless and soulless. Do any of them care at all? And am I stupid for caring? Am I fool for investing heart and soul in my campaigns?

 

[Imaro]

At the ending, when he was asked he said, they are hiring from the playerbase which is more diverse than ever and that they will naturally grow into high position.

He didn't say anything about hiring from the playerbase... he actually talks about them having diverse and highly talented designers and developers that are moving up in the ranks. Funny how regardless of what he said the assumption becomes unskilled hires only brought on for their race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

He also was asked about Orion Black, who felt, that they were just a diversity hire. That question should never arise.

They were speaking about Orion Black in relationship to WotC not being a safe work environment and there being a lack of diversity... not about him feeling like a diversity hire.

 

[mamba]

Somehow I doubt that's the real reason.

up to you, I think the actions match it however

"We were afraid of a metaverse VTT" sounds like an excuse that shifts any talk about competition or hostility away from fans and the tabletop gaming community and onto Facebook or some other big tech company.

it does, but that does not mean it needs to be a lie.

I think there is certainly a lot of truth to it, they definitely can compete against other VTTs without hobbling those other VTTs, and WotC knows that too.

None of this ever made sense from the perspective of them trying to kill the existing 3pps. There simply is no good reason to, so when he says they became collateral damage in WotC’s attempt to defend themselves from some big potential future threat, I believe him.

As to whether I believe there ever was much of a threat there to being with, that is a separate issue…

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I love the privilege espoused by those in a favored position in deciding how and when those not should be given equality...

I don't love that you're accusing another poster of casual racism.

 

[Imaro]

I don't love that you're accusing another poster of casual racism.

Not racism... privilege.. and yes it is a privilege to dictate when and how someone else should or shouldn't get equality.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There was a concern that the OGL allowed Facebook to make a D&D Metaverse without WotC involvement.

ROFL. Facebook has to fake feet for their Meta avatars. Worrying about them creating a VR D&D MMO is like me worrying about the tax implications of becoming a trillionaire.

 

[mamba]

Now WotC has to choose between continuing VTT development with the risk of a competitor using the 5.1 SRD, or abandon the VTT plans as too financially risky. I doubt it will be the later.

yeah, he was also asked how now that the SRD is under the CC they would protect themselves from this threat and the answer essentially was we cannot, we rely on the community to do so, much like it stood up this time

 

[UngeheuerLich]

He didn't say anything about hiring from the playerbase... he actually talks about them having diverse and highly talented designers and developers that are moving up in the ranks. Funny how regardless of what he said the assumption becomes unskilled hires only brought on for their race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.



They were speaking about Orion Black in relationship to WotC not being a safe work environment and there being a lack of diversity... not about him feeling like a diversity hire.

Then I misunderstood. I will listen again.

@Imaro
regarding Orion black, at minute 47, the interviewer expilcitely said, that Orion Black felt that way. I didn´t double check though.
regarding "unskilled hire", I misremembered that he said "from the playerbase", instead Kyle said, something akin to "look like the playersbase" and added, that you still want to hire for "what you can, not what you are".

So. I also want to add, that I do not assume that people are unskilled hires because of their race, gender, sexual orientation etc. On the contrary, I do believe in hiring people because of their skill and just brought it up, because I wanted to relate, what Kyle said about diverse people, when someone said, he should immediately leave. I then ansewred, that Kyle said, people of all kind are climbing up the rank, as they should.