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.

​

 

[mamba]

There is a difference, between PF1 and 5e-Post Tashas, beyond just the crunch. I want PF1.

that sounds more like a setting thing then, in which case you can make your setting whatever you want. Not even sure it matters for most published adventures

 

[mamba]

No, but Big Tent d&d isn't just a rock band.

no, but the point remains, they want to get new customers and keep their existing ones, not trade them in for new ones

 

[darjr]

I just outlined why the Meta concern was very likely real. With graphics and everything!

I meant to come back to your post and now can’t find it! Eeek.

 

[mamba]

It already happened. Pathfinder was the top-selling role-playing game in spring 2011, fall 2012, spring 2013, fall 2013, and summer 2014. During that four-year period, Pathfinder was at times able to outsell Dungeons & Dragons itself, which was the best-selling game through various editions between 1974 and 2010.

there are people on this forum who will disagree with you on that

At a minimum the circumstances were very different and Disney releasing their own new RPG now would not be able to benefit from them / replicate it

 

[mamba]

Pretty sure the Meta and Disney were never an actual concern.

then come up with a better explanation, I do not have one.

To me they voluntarily shot themselves in the foot, you do not do that unless something startled you, even if it turns out it was just you jumping at shadows

 

[Scribe]

that sounds more like a setting thing then, in which case you can make your setting whatever you want. Not even sure it matters for most published adventures

Its not just the setting, though I suppose it contributes. Its about the tone, the style, the 'feel'.

Admittedly, its not an easy thing to define, or I just am not able to express it well. Regardless, my suspicions are reinforced, the more I see/read/hear, and this is fine.

no, but the point remains, they want to get new customers and keep their existing ones, not trade them in for new ones

Right, exactly why the 5e apology edition made pains to go back and look like D&D traditionally has, and only after the more recent explosive growth, have they made small changes over time to not alienate the very group they sought to bring back.

Its the Alignment thing in a nutshell. "We have removed Alignment." and a certain segment cheered. "We heard you wanted it back, so its back in Fizbans." Because a DIFFERENT segment, wants it there. This is the issue to me, there is no vision. No clear goal. Its 'how do we appeal to as many as we can, without going to far and pissing off segment X, Y, or Z'.

Its a boiling frog at this point though, and I am quite sure that I want out. The playerbase is not a monolith. No individual segment is either. They cannot satisfy everyone, and their design/art/direction, is not interesting to me.

Thats totally fine, but when I see statements like what Brink makes, it doesnt alarm me, because I already figured it was the case, have for years! Its simply reinforcing what I already assumed.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Usually, abusing the emoji button to mock other’s posts is not going to draw moderation unless it’s obvious & egregious.

Well, @halfling rogue has decided to mock a red-text moderation post regarding anti-inclusive posting, in a thread they were already banned from. That’s going to earn them a no-expenses paid vacation from ENWorld.

This is an excellent path to travel if you don’t wish to stay here very long.

 

[Mournblade94]

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...



No one is advocating this.

Maybe not but I'm hoping Kyle Brinks resigns his position real soon after this interview. No reason to stick with WOTC when the much friendlier Castles and Crusades is available. Troll Lord appreciate all players and creators.

 

[Imaro]

Maybe not but I'm hoping Kyle Brinks resigns his position real soon after this interview. No reason to stick with WOTC when the much friendlier Castles and Crusades is available. Troll Lord appreciate all players and creators.

And I'm hoping knee jerk reactions from ill-informed people will die down and end. As for Kyle, after his second interview I'm hoping he sticks around, I'm starting to like this guy.

EDIT: Also I'd characterize Troll Lords games stance as more avoiding and ignoring very real issues that affect the game (thus supporting the status quo as is) which to be fair much of the OSR seems to do, rather than friendlier.

 

[AnotherGuy]

So if Kyle Brinks is really not the one responsible for the OGL decisions, it seems to my eyes like he's being used as a scapegoat...

This. Bashing Kyle does nothing good. He is front and centre and having to face the full brunt of an unhappy player base thanks to the decisions by x and y.