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.

​

 

[Myrdin Potter]

And, to back me up, Brink backs me up in the latest interview to come out...

• The hiring process has equity targets to bring in a representative sample of candidates, after which it is who is the best candidate.
• There has been increasing diversity in the pool of designers while maintaining quality.

Kyle Brink Interviewed by Teos Abadia (Alphastream) on OGL, WotC, & D&D

D&D executive producer's Kyle Brink's second hour-long interview OGL/D&D has dropped--this one is with Teos Abadia, otherwise known as Alphastream. The notes below are my attempt to paraphrase the main things Brink said, but as always you should watch the actual video if you want the full...

www.enworld.org

This is like HR 101 today. I think when the Orion Black situation blew up, HQ finally sent / ensured that there was a responsible HR practice. Hard to applaud a company the size of Hasbro for doing something that has been standard practice for at least a decade, but at least they changed.

This is how I made sure my pool was diverse like 20 years ago. My recruiting instructions were “make sure that the pool we will be reviewing is representative of the place where we are recruiting for and qualified.”

The only moral question I had (and have) for myself when making the final decision on who I picked is that maybe I had a slight bias for people that looked or were different than me (CIS Male). I figured that part of the interview process is an emotional reaction about fit and I probably liked people like me more easily so anyone not like me that made it to the decision had overcome that potential bias as well as doing well in the interviews.

I believe (and could be wrong) that previous to a better and more fair to everyone process at WoTC, they were not that professional.

I am glad that they are hiring a good pool of designers and the process makes sure that they have a good chance to hire a diverse pool of qualified people.

 

[Jer]

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.

That's how it works in corporate America tho - Kyle's the head of the team that this is a problem for. That makes it his problem and he's the one who has to fix it regardless of whether he's the one who created it or not.

I feel for the guy and it probably shouldn't be his job, but if he wants it done right he's probably the only one to do it.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

While I think the 3.5 SRD is extremely important to the third-party community, I don't want WotC to put it under Creative Commons. That's because a CC license isn't any safer than the OGL; it just seems safer. WotC can still threaten litigation against anyone, at any time, for any reason; regardless of the legal veracity of their claim, the idea of "you'd go bankrupt defending yourself, even if you're right" remains. And I have no doubt that you'd be right no matter which license you used, since most of the lawyers that I'm aware of said that WotC's ability to revoke/de-authorize the OGL was shaky at best.

What putting the 3.5 SRD under CC does is create two markets of 3.5-compatible products, operating in parallel. That's an issue, because it bisects what's been (to my mind) the strongest utility of the open gaming community, which is that they can freely reuse and modify everyone else's Open Game Content. Now, you'd have two distinct categories of products, each under their own license. Want to use some cool new material from product X in your product Y? Too bad! Your product Y is an OGL product, and product X was published under Creative Commons!

Now, maybe there's a way to use both licenses in the same product at the same time, but honestly that seems like a tricky tightrope to walk. Far better to keep that entire market united under a single license, like it has been for almost twenty-five years.

The problem is people no longer trust the OGL.

 

[AnotherGuy]

you did see who was being interviewed, right? If it were about optics I assume we would see a different person sitting there

That's illogical
You're essentially saying because WotC never used a non white male for the interview they wouldn't hire on optics which is not a great argument.

I do find it interesting THAT podcast was the first one they decided to answer on. Didn't you?

 

[Alzrius]

The problem is people no longer trust the OGL.

Leaving aside the semantic distinction that it's WotC that people have lost trust in (the OGL is the same as it ever was), trust and legal protection are two different things. A lot of what I hear conflates the two, and suggests that people want the appearance of safety more than actual safety.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

That's illogical
You're essentially saying because WotC never used a non white male for the interview they wouldn't hire on optics which is not a great argument.

I do find it interesting THAT podcast was the first one they decided to answer on. Didn't you?

We don’t know that. In the 2nd interview posted he said he just got done with another interview- which hasn’t been posted yet. The order of posting doesn’t necessarily match the order of the interview

 

[I'm A Banana]

I keep on prefer when people are not choosen by their color but by their skills...

It's been a few pages, so I suppose it's time to tap the sign.

I think we can hold these two ideas in our head at the same time:

1. In a perfect world, people would get hired purely based on their skill at the task they are being hired for.
2. In reality, nobody has ever gotten hired purely based on their skill at the task they are being hired for.

 

[AnotherGuy]

@Sacrosanct is correct, at least in part. I have seen that very argument made on these forums.

It's binary, it goes nowhere. It's not an argument in good faith. The media does stuff like this all the time. If you cannot see it, then I don't know what more to say.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Disney has a ttrpg... it is their own intellectual property and proprietary system... it has not surpassed D&D.

Which? The Marvel game that's not out yet?

Also I think the fact that there are tons of licensed rpg's from very popular franchises that haven't been able to garner the market share D&D has. So I think this assumption isn't as cut and dry as you are presenting it.

I'm not saying that Disney could "beat" D&D. I'm saying they can create a profitable RPG without picking WotC's pocket to do so.

 

[AnotherGuy]

We don’t know that. In the 2nd interview posted he said he just got done with another interview- which hasn’t been posted yet. The order of posting doesn’t necessarily match the order of the interview

Maybe. Still - you'd think initially more popular podcasters would have been selected for a wider audience base. And it would be in the interest of the podcasters to release their interview first before others.

My argument is optics matter - and to assume they don't (to WotC) because Kyle was selected to be the face of WotC at this time - doesn't flow.