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 context.

​

Company Structure

• There's around 30 people on the D&D team, and that many again freelancers.​
• 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.​
• Brink reports to Dan Rawson, senior VP of D&D, who reports to Cynthia Williams, president.​
• D&D Beyond is the front door to D&D on the web and will be even more so. It is the D&D website, and will become more so.​
• D&D Game Studio is center for game content. D&D Beyond turns that into a play service. Content gets expressed in ways appropriate to an audiance (ie digital, book, etc.)​

OGL/Creative Commons

• It was a surprise to some of the D&D team that the OGL might be changed. Partly that was about shielding them from distracting stuff. Brink feels that was too strong a wall and their views might have been beneficial.
• Some internal feedback from the D&D team reflected the views of external creators.
• The community's point of view was not the one wining internally, but may have been had people there been able to speak more loudly.
• The worry was about new technologies and big companies--Brink uses the VR example, with user generated content but poor content controls. They didn't want the term D&D to become 'that video porn game' looking ahead.
• The position now is that the community is the strongest weapon against that.
• The royalties were to discourage big companies moving in and redefining D&D. By 'drips and drips' they got to the wrong position. $750K was a ceiling which they felt would not affect most creators, and larger companies would deal directly with WotC.
• Right now they're looking at protecting D&D via things not now in the Creative Commons. Community protects the open space and WotC protects copyright and trademark.
• They feel that the community is able to take care of hateful content.
• They want the creator community. A deal where WotC got more powers to act but lost the creator community was not a good deal.
• NFTs are not the concern, it's about how people use them for scams.
• WotC will be publishing a content policy (for representation, hateful content, etc.) and hold themselves to it. They cannot hold others to it.
• The Creative Commons license chosen's lack of sharealike attribution isn't a problem for WotC. They want people to build stuff they own and don't have to share and build value in their own IP. They've chosen the road which gives creators the choice, and can make any of their content sharealike, but WotC isn't forcing them to.
• CC means that nobody has to take WotC's word for anything as they don't control that license.
• The drive to change the OGL was coming from various parts of the organization (legal, business, studio). It was an ongoing effort when Brink arrived.
• The faster the audience grew the bigger the risk that hateful content or scams would arise, so there was a rising sense of urgency to take action.
• Did anybody sign the v1.1 version? It was distributed with an NDA, and with some creators a discussion about other arrnagements/licenses they might make separate from the OGL.
• 'The impression someone could get that I have to sign v1.1 is absotely a believable impression for someone to get'.
• The design of v1.1. was always going to be an ongoing no-signature process.
• Feedback from larger creators like Kobold Press, the failing is on WotC for not communicating that they were listening. 'Thanks for the feedback' isn't enough.
• 'If you're going to write a new OGL to protect yourself from the vulnerabilties of the old OGL, you kinda have to take the old OGL off the table, otherwise you're not protecting yourself at all'. There's no point in changing the OGL if you don't de-authorize the old one.
• They weren't worried about competitors arising from within the community. They love the creator community, and WotC can't satisfy all appetites. That serves the broad needs of the player community.
• They wanted to have closer relationships with the most successful creators, talking to them about licenses and going bigger. The tiering structure was meant to identify those creators. 'The way it was executed was very cleary going to be an attenuating destructive structure which we did not want.'
• The OGL survey results were clear, from a range of people, 15000 responses. The intent was to treat it like a playtest but it became obvious where it was going. The survey feedback supported CC, and there was no reason to drag it out.
• WotC still has their concerns, but their approach to it has changed (to a combo of copyrght/trademark and community).
• Putting D&D into CC has made de-authing the OGL unimportant to WotC.
• The SRD will be updated to continue to be compatible with evolving rules.
• They're looking at adding the 3.5 SRD to the SRD but they have to review that content to make sure they're not accidentally putting stuff into CC.

Company Culture

• People being afraid to speak up is a sign of 'immature management' and leading from ego.
• That's not the kind of leaders WotC has today, but Brink cannot speak about those who were there before he arrived.
• Brink feels that every month he is there people feel more comfortable speaking up, though that doesn't mean they'll always agree. But they will listen.
• 'That's not how we operate today but I can certainly believe echoes of that in the past'.

VTTs/Digital/DDB

• Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds are important to the hobby and WotC.
• WotC is also making digital playspaces. The goal is to give more choice. The way WotC succeeds is if they make the best stuff. It's a 'virtuos' competition.
• The license that Roll20 etc. has to sell WotC content still applies. Remains to be seen down the road.
• It's possible that third party content will be seen inside DDB or the VTT but it takes a fair amount of work to being a piece of content in. It would have to be a pretty important piece of third party content. Brink could see a day when that would happen.

One D&D

• The OGL issue has not impacted the One D&D strategy. It has maybe helped WotC express their plans publicly.
• D&D should be a living game which evolves but is familiar.
• The One D&D timeline is not changed, but the playtest timeline was impacted by the OGL situation. They'll get back on track real soon.
• A professional research team gathers the survey information.
• There are also internal playtests with robust feedback.

Other

• The game team has gained more of a voice.
• More trust has been built between design leadership and the executive team.
• Dan Rawson's role is new and is the first time the D&D brand has been represented at that level at the executive level.
• Cynthia Williams is empathetic and data-oriented, and willing to change direction.
• It sounds like they'd consider the SRD being placed into French, German, Italian, and Spanish, though Brink did not promise.

 

[Dausuul]

Has no one asked if Kyle Brink has ever played D&D?

According to this interview, he started 44 years ago and has a still-active campaign that he's been running continuously, across multiple editions, since 1988.

So, I'd call that a "yes."

 

[Enrahim2]

I'd rather hear from him than some PR spokesperson

I agree to that. However I pointed out there is a difference between customer relations and community management. The pressence of a competent community management team within wizards seem like something that should have strongly protected against this happening in the first place, if Kyle's accounts of motivation is accurate.

From his description this came about due to the decission makers being effectively blind to the community sentiment, and them completely miscommunicating to both the 1.1 recipients and the community as a whole after the leak. This is rather kind of things I would usually assume to be the responsibility of community management to get right in the first place.

Hence under the assumption that they indeed has a community management team, the explanation about their motives falls appart. However if they actually do not have anyone empowered to such a role, his description of what happened seem a lot more plausible to me than the evil Corp actively jeopardising their market dominance through greed narrative.

 

[mamba]

I agree to that. However I pointed out there is a difference between customer relations and community management. The pressence of a competent community management team within wizards seem like something that should have strongly protected against this happening in the first place, if Kyle's accounts of motivation is accurate.

From his description this came about due to the decission makers being effectively blind to the community sentiment, and them completely miscommunicating to both the 1.1 recipients and the community as a whole after the leak. This is rather kind of things I would usually assume to be the responsibility of community management to get right in the first place.

I don't know, just because some team has objections does not mean the decision goes their way. It sounded like there were concerns, but they were ignored. Not sure whether that was just him and his team or not, but I do not think a community management team would necessarily have prevented any of this, esp. since supposedly the community engagement was yet to come, but the document was leaked, rendering the whole plan obsolete.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I really enjoyed the first several years of 5e content, I though the arcs and art was good stuff and we played a lot of it. Even did AL at the cons for years! But the last few have been awful in comparison, my opinion only of course. So yeah quality has been a really bummer for me, and the art has taken a serious down turn, just embarrassingly bad! Check out the legacy Volo art vs the "current monster" art for good examples of what I'm referring to.

IMO, the Spelljammer and Dragonlance art is easily the best art in all of 5e. I've grown to seriously dislike a lot of the art from earlier books.

I think this is just subjective. There is no "truth" in their inherent quality.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Call of the Netherdeep (actually checked out and read from my local library) was a toothless bore of an adventure that can be beaten by an NPC party while the group is on auto pilot

Written by the Critical Role team, not WotC. And, notably, is much more of an "experimental adventure" than the others. The NPC party is included as reoccuring rivals with whom the party can interact/compete. Sure, the rival party can solve the adventure. But they're there to enhance the fun of the adventure through roleplay and competition.

Hoard of the Dragon Queen - I've ran it when 5e first came out. It's Forest Oracle quality dreck.

Yeah, you can thank Kobold Press for that adventure. They're the ones that wrote it, not WotC's primary design team.

Candlelight Mysteries and Radiant Citadel - flipped through them and scanned through a couple adventures. Don't seem useful for the price. Maybe if I could get an individual one that seemed interesting, but I'm not buying a $40-50 hardcover thinking I "might" use a 3 page adventure.

Sure, criticize the price all you want. Doesn't affect the quality of the adventures, though.

Are there a lot of terrible 5e adventures? Sure. There are also a lot of terrible adventures in every edition of the game. Are there a lot of great 5e adventures (or adventures with notable redeeming qualities)? Absolutely. Curse of Strahd, Tomb of Annihilation, many of the adventures in the compilation books, and so on have great adventures in 5e.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Actually he says that WOTC was afraidof someone making an adult mod on something associated with D&D and people outside of the TTRPG community thinking D&D is an adult game.

You only warp your whole veiw of your IP like that if you primarily cared about the IP as a brand name first and the product under the brand name after..

There are erotic Star Trek novels online. The IP was not hurt. These "concerns" in my opinion, are distractions/misdirections.

 

[Retreater]

Written by the Critical Role team, not WotC. And, notably, is much more of an "experimental adventure" than the others. The NPC party is included as reoccuring rivals with whom the party can interact/compete. Sure, the rival party can solve the adventure. But they're there to enhance the fun of the adventure through roleplay and competition.

Netherdeep isn't for me. I did read it with the intent to consider it for a campaign because my wife is a CR fan, but it doesn't line up for me.
Still published and lead designed by WotC. That's in the credits page.

Yeah, you can thank Kobold Press for that adventure. They're the ones that wrote it, not WotC's primary design team.

Yeah. I actually ignored the entirety of KP's output for years after that adventure.
I'd give the thing a pass for being the first adventure before anyone knew how to write adventures if they'd stop reprinting it every three years like it's a bona fide classic.

Sure, criticize the price all you want. Doesn't affect the quality of the adventures, though.

Well, price is a big factor in perceived value. I don't want to pay a full hardcover price for a collection of "drop in a one shot when you need something at the last minute" random adventures. I want something that's going to engage my players for months.
If you see the value in that, great.

Curse of Strahd, Tomb of Annihilation

Agreed. These were fantastic. I've run them multiple times.
Yawning Portal has a couple good ones. Another single good adventure in Ghosts of Saltmarsh.

 

[Minigiant]

There are erotic Star Trek novels online. The IP was not hurt. These "concerns" in my opinion, are distractions/misdirections.

Again, youarethinking like a normal person. Not as aperson who sat through a meeting about "Ever since X, our stock price drop 15%" and "How do we take 25% of Company X's business?"

I don't think they were afraid of Adult D&D that much. That's just a "foot in the door" argument. The fear was Megacorp competition over brand names.

 

[Enrahim2]

I don't know, just because some team has objections does not mean the decision goes their way. It sounded like there were concerns, but they were ignored. Not sure whether that was just him and his team or not, but I do not think a community management team would necessarily have prevented any of this, esp. since supposedly the community engagement was yet to come, but the document was leaked, rendering the whole plan obsolete.

You say that the community engagement was yet to come. The wording kyle has used i believe has been that they wanted input before involving the  wider community. The line between where business relations end and community begins is for the case of wizards a continum. I get the impression that this might have been handled mainly by business relations (where I think they might have a strong team), while in 20 20 hindsight I think it seem like this should clearly have been a joint effort between business and community management - if the later existed in a strong form.

Moreover a key observation making me question the presence of a serious community management team is that Kyle describe his team as empowered in future conversations. If there indeed had been an ignored community management team as you suggest, wouldn't that have been a more natural team to promote being strengthened - rather than members of a team that of people hired to do specialized design?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Netherdeep isn't for me. I did read it with the intent to consider it for a campaign because my wife is a CR fan, but it doesn't line up for me.
Still published and lead designed by WotC. That's in the credits page.

2 of the 3 lead designers for Netherdeep were CR people. Most of the main writers were also CR people. The book was primarily written by the CR team, not the D&D team.

Yeah. I actually ignored the entirety of KP's output for years after that adventure.
I'd give the thing a pass for being the first adventure before anyone knew how to write adventures if they'd stop reprinting it every three years like it's a bona fide classic.

Yeah, I also don't particularly like most of Kobold Press's content. It's strange to me that so many people praise their content, when most of their stuff that I've read was either mid-quality (Tome of Beasts 1 and 2, Creature Codex) or pretty bad (Tyranny of Dragons, Midgard Heroes' Handbook). And it's definitely weird that the adventure gets reprinted so often. But that doesn't mean it's WotC's fault for the quality of the adventure.

Well, price is a big factor in perceived value. I don't want to pay a full hardcover price for a collection of "drop in a one shot when you need something at the last minute" random adventures. I want something that's going to engage my players for months.
If you see the value in that, great.

In the value of the book and whether I'm going to buy it, sure, price is a factor. In the value/quality of the adventure, absolutely not. It's just weird to bring up "5e adventures suck" and giving "they cost too much" as a reason. That's not a sign of the adventure/book being bad. It's a sign of it being overpriced for how much use you're going to get out of it.

I'm not telling you that WotC is perfect at how they sell their books. I think they could definitely do better. D&D Beyond and DMsGuild should definitely give the option of buying individual adventures from WotC's adventure compilation books, so that way you could pick and choose the adventures that you've heard are good/are interested in. But I'm just saying to not judge the quality of the adventures written buy the book's price tag or the format that the book was published in.

Agreed. These were fantastic. I've run them multiple times.
Yawning Portal has a couple good ones. Another single good adventure in Ghosts of Saltmarsh.

Yep. I personally enjoyed a couple of the adventures in Saltmarsh (The Styes and Salvage Operation). And though I haven't run them, I've heard that a lot of the adventures in Candlekeep Mysteries and Radiant Citadel are good. And Explorer's Guide to Wildemount has some good adventures, too.