The OGL: Why is this really happening, and what to do now...

[Scribe]

See, I refrain from categorizing in good and evil (except in my D&D game). I try to see their reasoning and understand what they did. Usually it follows some logic.
Lets say, you are an employee at WotC who is dependend on WotC having a certain exclusivity, becauae otherwise the thing you did would not be financial viable. So your job depends on it.
Do you think it is evil?

That does not mean, it was anywhere near a good idea to jump on 3PP with such an insulting OGL 1.1. I think it was bullying.
Now lets see how the bully reacts to resistance. It is not a cool thing to become the bully yourself. This just ends in a spiral of hate.

I believe its a great shorthand, just as Alignment has always been for me.

Lawful - They follow the letter of the law.
Evil - To get what they want at the expense of others.

Simple.

There is no product concept under the sun, which Wizards could not have leveraged their UNRIVALED (in the space) social media, brand name, and (at the time) good will, into numbers WELL beyond being profitable. Anything a 3PP has done, or will do, Wizards could outsell them dramatically on the D&D name alone.

So, I find your scenario false, and misleading.

 

[Pedantic]

Yep, that is what get's me too. I just do not see the need to blow everything up, ...yet. Sure pressure WotC now. But do it with the intent of making things better, not just to destroy everything.

Personally, at this point I want a better OGL 1.2, not a 1.0(b). IF we work with them, we might get that. If we don't, I think our chances go down. If we don't get what we want, then sure - burn down if that works for you.

I just don't know how to engage with this attitude. WotC made a promise, kept it for 20 years, then abruptly decided they could tear it down. Is it just pragmatism, assuming that's a fait accompli and all we can do is get some smaller concession now? Even in that case, why would we not start with our preferred arrangement of the previous status quo and let them wear us down?

More significantly though, I feel betrayed and angry, and I don't know why I shouldn't demand that would be remedied and apologized for, in whatever form that takes. This is not a situation two parties with conflicting goals both showed up to and now have to negotiate the best compromise. We had an agreement, one side has acted in bad faith, and I want them to stop and ideally show remorse.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I believe its a great shorthand, just as Alignment has always been for me.

Lawful - They follow the letter of the law.
Evil - To get what they want at the expense of others.

Simple.

There is no product concept under the sun, which Wizards could not have leveraged their UNRIVALED (in the space) social media, brand name, and (at the time) good will, into numbers WELL beyond being profitable. Anything a 3PP has done, or will do, Wizards could outsell them dramatically on the D&D name alone.

So, I find your scenario false, and misleading.

While I do agree with your assessment, I think this might not align with WotC's assessment.
I think if WotC would not be worried about their profit, they would not have done dumb things.
After all, making money is a publicly shared company's goal. Hiring 350 people to work on something is not done lightly...

 

[Scribe]

While I do agree with your assessment, I think this might not align with WotC's assessment.
I think if WotC would not be worried about their profit, they would not have done dumb things.
After all, making money is a publicly shared company's goal. Hiring 350 people to work on something is not done lightly...

1. The problem is not 'Wizards assessment' its about greed.
2. They are worried about profit, not that they are not making one, but that they need to figure out how to make MORE.
3. This argument (public company, make money) is meaningless.

They already make a profit.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

1. The problem is not 'Wizards assessment' its about greed.
2. They are worried about profit, not that they are not making one, but that they need to figure out how to make MORE.
3. This argument (public company, make money) is meaningless.

They already make a profit.

I don't think it is all about greed. I don't run a big company, but generating money you can invest again to gain more money is what companies keeps running. Fall under a certain treshold, and you need to stop investing. Which will often result in your company declining.

I don't think, WotC was close to that point and I think they did a bad move in bad faith and rightfully lost trust. But it is not unreasonal nor evil.

 

[Jer]

After all, making money is a publicly shared company's goal.

Not always. Often pumping up the value of the companies shares it the company goal.

This can sometimes align with making money long term. But sometimes it leads to very bad short term decisions that might make things go up in the short term but actually cost money in the long term.

In this case I personally believe that Hasbro has fallen into the trap of focusing way too much on their tanking stock value (a stock value that was never worth the heights it hit) and are trying to find ways to get their angry shareholders off their backs so they're not even thinking about the long term repercussions of their short term decisions.

Maximizing revenue in the short term is not the same as making money in the long term. A company can focus very hard on the former and severely hamper its ability to do the latter.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Not always. Often pumping up the value of the companies shares it the company goal.

This can sometimes align with making money long term. But sometimes it leads to very bad short term decisions that might make things go up in the short term but actually cost money in the long term.

In this case I personally believe that Hasbro has fallen into the trap of focusing way too much on their tanking stock value (a stock value that was never worth the heights it hit) and are trying to find ways to get their angry shareholders off their backs so they're not even thinking about the long term repercussions of their short term decisions.

Maximizing revenue in the short term is not the same as making money in the long term. A company can focus very hard on the former and severely hamper its ability to do the latter.

100% agree. This is why I think we need to let the door open for them to earn long term trust and money.
So all theat "never biyong anything WotC again" will close that door and might lead to a lose-lose situation for wotc and us.

 

[Jer]

100% agree. This is why I think we need to let the door open for them to earn long term trust and money.
So all theat "never biyong anything WotC again" will close that door and might lead to a lose-lose situation for wotc and us.

I mean here's the thing. If they back off entirely then I'm happy to continue to buy Hasbro stuff. If they continue with their moves to remove the existing SRDs out of the OGL 1.0 then I don't have to buy anything from Hasbro again. I don't even think of it as a boycott, just not buying from a company I consider to be unethical. I do that all of the time.

It's not even going to be hard. It's not like Hasbro is an agricultural company or an internet company that I actually need to deal with to live my life because I have no real choice. It's not even an Amazon that makes my life more convenient. Nor is it a Disney that has wormed its way into so many things it's hard to know you're interacting with them until you do. It's a toy and game company. And I can buy toys and games from other companies fairly easily.

I think the biggest thing I'd miss is new Heroquest packs to be honest. All of this nonsense around D&D has put such a sour taste in my mouth that honestly even if they back down completely it may be a while before I want to play "official Wizards branded D&D TMTMTM pat. pending" again anyway. But even there it's a thing I can not just easily do without, it's a thing that both my bank account and my wife would be happier if I did without. There's no real downside for me not buying new stuff from Hasbro really.

 

[Cadence]

It's not even going to be hard. It's not like Hasbro is an agricultural company or an internet company that I actually need to deal with to live my life because I have no real choice. It's not even an Amazon that makes my life more convenient. Nor is it a Disney that has wormed its way into so many things it's hard to know you're interacting with them until you do. It's a toy and game company. And I can buy toys and games from other companies fairly easily.

I think the biggest thing I'd miss is new Heroquest packs to be honest.

Thinking about Hasbro and our household, the big two would be Nerf and Power Rangers.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

There is no product concept under the sun, which Wizards could not have leveraged their UNRIVALED (in the space) social media, brand name, and (at the time) good will, into numbers WELL beyond being profitable. Anything a 3PP has done, or will do, Wizards could outsell them dramatically on the D&D name alone.

good bad or indifferent that is not the metric they care about.
They don't care if another company ONLY make 5% of what they do... they care tht they COULD make more

it's not WotC vs Green ROnin and who ever makes more wins... it's WotC this year against WotC last year, and the only way to make more is to drive Green Ronin out and capture those sales