D&D General NFTs Are Here To Ruin Dungeons & Dragons

[Dannyalcatraz]

If there is curiosity about why many are so angrily opposed to this business model gaining any legitimacy or traction

My initial resistance is based in the ecological impact of anything using current blockchain tech.

Then, as others have asked, I don’t see a real benefit of using blockchain for this application over other forms of data management.

Beyond that, I’m not seeing value here. At least, not for the players. But that’s personal- I may simply lack vision in this case.

 

[CleverNickName]

I am not worried about Gripnr. I am worried about Hasbro. If you don't think Hasbro is watching this, watching to see if they can find a new way to monetize this hobby, then you are already a mark. The line must be drawn here. No. As a community. No. Never. Gaming is already money gated for many people. No more gates.

Well, if the worst should happen, and Hasbro decides to shift D&D over to NFTs, pay-to-play subscriptions, and other foolishness, I already have everything I need to ignore it utterly. At the end of the day, all I ever need to play Dungeons & Dragons is my friends, my Rules Cyclopedia, and some dice. I mean, I'm their customer and I'm one of their biggest cheerleaders, but I'm also theirs to lose.

It's rotten, but I've done it before. I went from backing dozens of projects a year on Kickstarter, to never backing a single Kickstarter project ever again...just for merely considering NFTs. I'll drop Hasbro too, and not even flinch.

 

[Jer]

From this I learned that each "certified DM" is going to be able to claim one part of the world as their own and nobody else will be "allowed" to run campaigns there and I died a little inside. I assume that each section of the world will be minted as its own NFT as well and DMs will be allowed to sell the campaign areas they developed amongst themselves as well.

Every thing I learn about the monetezation around this model makes it sound worse.

 

[CleverNickName]

Yep, just what I expected. "Hey guys, (jargon jargon jargon COMPUTER MONEY jargon jargon) woo!"

 

[bulletmeat]

Yep, just what I expected. "Hey guys, (jargon jargon jargon COMPUTER MONEY jargon jargon) woo!"

The nice part is that if I see some good loot ideas they come up with for D&D, I can copy and use for my home game as easily as 'Print Screen'.

 

[Mort]

From this I learned that each "certified DM" is going to be able to claim one part of the world as their own and nobody else will be "allowed" to run campaigns there and I died a little inside. I assume that each section of the world will be minted as its own NFT as well and DMs will be allowed to sell the campaign areas they developed amongst themselves as well.

Every thing I learn about the monetezation around this model makes it sound worse.

Wow, You wouldn't think there would be people who read Ready Player One and rooted for IOI (the main, cartoonishly bad, bad guys)?!?

Yet here you go!

 

[Jer]

The nice part is that if I see some good loot ideas they come up with for D&D, I can copy and use for my home game as easily as 'Print Screen'.

What are you? Some kind of "right clicker" or something?

 

[darjr]

Just as suspected. The billionaire boss is a crypto bro.

 

[Jer]

Wow, You wouldn't think there would be people who read Ready Player One and rooted for IOI (the main, cartoonishly bad, bad guys)?!?

Yet here you go!

To be fair - Mark Zuckerberg apparently read Snow Crash and thought it presented a positive future that he should work towards.

There are a lot of people out there whose mindsets are just foreign to me.

 

[Vaalingrade]

My favorite thing is seeing them try time and time again to make headway into an industry where every customer hates them for ruining their experience in that industry by making video cards as rare as hen's teeth and as expensive as the link to a jpg stolen from deviant art.

 

[Mort]

To be fair - Mark Zuckerberg apparently read Snow Crash and thought it presented a positive future that he should work towards.

There are a lot of people out there whose mindsets are just foreign to me.

Somehow that doesn't surprise me!

 

[Cadence]

I sit here thinking "If I had $x0,000,000+, I would freaking retire instantaneously and could see using a part of that to launch a small game company, or FLGS, or bar for fun." I wonder if the drive required to get $x0,000,000+ goes against the desire to retire and do that.

 

[J.Quondam]

To be fair - Mark Zuckerberg apparently read Snow Crash and thought it presented a positive future that he should work towards.

There are a lot of people out there whose mindsets are just foreign to me.

Irritatingly, a distressing number of them have uncounted billions of dollars and massive followings. Even if they can't successfully change the world into their desired dystopian hellscape in the end, can sure can wreak a lot of havoc in the real world just by trying to do so.

 

[bulletmeat]

Irritatingly, a distressing number of them have uncounted billions of dollars and massive followings. Even if they can't successfully change the world into their desired dystopian hellscape in the end, can sure can wreak a lot of havoc in the real world just by trying to do so.

Many CEOs have been doing this for decades.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think these are two separate things, though.

I think that even if every crypto-farmer turned to renewables, all that would end up doing is encourage people to buy more crypto (at least, it would encourage people who are interested in it but don't want to do be involved because of the environmental cost, which renewables would mitigate). I don't really think people would say "Huh, it looks like Bob's House o' NFTs has solar panels, maybe I should get them too."

Also, my--admittedly not in-depth--research indicates that at least some crypto farms are claiming to already be using renewables to one degree or another. Whether they actually are (or are just lying about it) is another matter, but if they are, then... they haven't been responsible for creating a noticeably huge demand.

And since they require so much electricity, they want it cheap, and it's highly unlikely they'll switch to 100% renewables unless mandated--and it's also unlikely that governments are going to mandate that 100% renewables just because of crypto.

You still don't seem to be understanding what I'm writing. (I don't care if you agree, but it would be nice if your response seemed like you understood.)

It's not that someone is looking at an NFT business with a solar farm and thinking to themselves, "maybe I should get me some of those fancy panel things". If a big industry (and in the case of crypto, I'm using the term industry very loosely) with a lot of money were to inject that money into renewables, that would boost the renewables industry, likely lowering prices in the long term. Those lower prices are what would make the average consumer more likely to adopt renewables. And if you can keep that process going, growth and costs can keep improving (at least until market saturation is reached, but market saturation of renewables would be a very good thing).

This isn't based on speculation either. We've already seen this work with government subsidies and incentives for the renewables industry. It's just that we've reached a point where those subsidies aren't enough to keep the process going at a good pace.

In the long term, renewables can be very cost effective. And there is some evidence that crypto may give the renewables market a significant boost. Whether that actually WILL happen is admittedly pure speculation at this point, but it is within the realm of possibility. Even partial adoption of renewables by crypto would not only help mitigate the absurd energy requirements thereof, but also help fuel growth in the renewables industry.

That's not to say that crypto is saving the world. It's not. It's a thing, with flaws, and hopefully someone will design a better thing sooner than not, that isn't so flawed. But, if we're lucky, it might just incentivize the people who have the means to invest in something that just might save the world, largely out of their own self interest.

 

[bulletmeat]

Actually this might be good; if I turn my character into a No F****** Thanks, err, NFT and this company creates something similar then I can sue for copyright infringement.

 

[bulletmeat]

You still don't seem to be understanding what I'm writing. (I don't care if you agree, but it would be nice if your response seemed like you understood.)

It's not that someone is looking at an NFT business with a solar farm and thinking to themselves, "maybe I should get me some of those fancy panel things". If a big industry (and in the case of crypto, I'm using the term industry very loosely) with a lot of money were to inject that money into renewables, that would boost the renewables industry, likely lowering prices in the long term. Those lower prices are what would make the average consumer more likely to adopt renewables. And if you can keep that process going, growth and costs can keep improving (at least until market saturation is reached, but market saturation of renewables would be a very good thing).

This isn't based on speculation either. We've already seen this work with government subsidies and incentives for the renewables industry. It's just that we've reached a point where those subsidies aren't enough to keep the process going at a good pace.

In the long term, renewables can be very cost effective. And there is some evidence that crypto may give the renewables market a significant boost. Whether that actually WILL happen is admittedly pure speculation at this point, but it is within the realm of possibility. Even partial adoption of renewables by crypto would not only help mitigate the absurd energy requirements thereof, but also help fuel growth in the renewables industry.

That's not to say that crypto is saving the world. It's not. It's a thing, with flaws, and hopefully someone will design a better thing sooner than not, that isn't so flawed. But, if we're lucky, it might just incentivize the people who have the means to invest in something that just might save the world, largely out of their own self interest.

like this?

Tesla, Block and Blockstream team up to mine bitcoin off solar power in Texas

Blockstream and Jack Dorsey's Block are breaking ground on a solar- and battery-powered bitcoin mine in Texas using solar and storage technology from Tesla.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Remathilis]

Yep, just what I expected. "Hey guys, (jargon jargon jargon COMPUTER MONEY jargon jargon) woo!"

"stop with the FUD bro. Diamond Hands. We're going to the moon!"

 

[Vaalingrade]

You still don't seem to be understanding what I'm writing. (I don't care if you agree, but it would be nice if your response seemed like you understood.)

It's not that someone is looking at an NFT business with a solar farm and thinking to themselves, "maybe I should get me some of those fancy panel things". If a big industry (and in the case of crypto, I'm using the term industry very loosely) with a lot of money were to inject that money into renewables, that would boost the renewables industry, likely lowering prices in the long term. Those lower prices are what would make the average consumer more likely to adopt renewables. And if you can keep that process going, growth and costs can keep improving (at least until market saturation is reached, but market saturation of renewables would be a very good thing).

This isn't based on speculation either. We've already seen this work with government subsidies and incentives for the renewables industry. It's just that we've reached a point where those subsidies aren't enough to keep the process going at a good pace.

In the long term, renewables can be very cost effective. And there is some evidence that crypto may give the renewables market a significant boost. Whether that actually WILL happen is admittedly pure speculation at this point, but it is within the realm of possibility. Even partial adoption of renewables by crypto would not only help mitigate the absurd energy requirements thereof, but also help fuel growth in the renewables industry.

That's not to say that crypto is saving the world. It's not. It's a thing, with flaws, and hopefully someone will design a better thing sooner than not, that isn't so flawed. But, if we're lucky, it might just incentivize the people who have the means to invest in something that just might save the world, largely out of their own self interest.

You know what?

None of that matters.

Let's pretend they actually care and tomorrow they all switch to renewable energy and that causes a solar boom. It will never happen and these farms are too decentralized for us to even reasonably pretend this, but let's just say it happens for the moment.

It doesn't matter.

Because it's still a technology in search of a purpose hopelessly mired in a culture of greed and grift that thrives on scams, taking advantage of people in poor and developing countries, steeling IP, worshipping conspicuous consumption, wallowing in ignorance of law, common sense and how technology works, constantly trying to expand itself where it doesn't belong and manipulate any subculture they think they can weasel their buzzwords into.

Saying they 'might' do something they will never and would never either want or be able to do doesn't fix the rot that goes straight to the core of crypto.

 

[Faolyn]

No, @Fanaelialae, I may not fully understand what you mean. But I think that "if we're lucky" isn't really good enough for now. Especially, as @Vaalingrade says, because the whole thing is based around greed. And not even greed for something that's physically real or useful in any way. Nobody needs to buy someone else's character sheet, especially not for these prices.

​