D&D General Why Enworld should liberate D&D from Hasbro

[popuman]

Ahhhhh the ‘both sides” argument shows up.
And just like “objectivity” and “ideological neutrality”. Cringe.

 

[Morrus]

in fact, the biggest problem would probably be too many 'someones' all trying to rescue it at once and all pulling in different directions.

You're behind the times. That shipped sailed ages ago.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Absolute objectivity is not possible, but honesty is.
Other point is the risk the audience to think the author is a know-it-all but he doesn't know so much. Maybe a story is to report a situtation but there are two tiers because the criticism is always only against a group and nothing is said about others, or the writter The writer makes an accurate diagnosis but proposes a disastrous solution that, if put into practice, has counterproductive results. Or he only repeats something said by a lot of people before.
It is really annoying when a story is used to report the fanaticism and intolerance, but nothing about the right ways to fix it, promoting the good sense and the respect for the human dignity.

Please, if you want to convey a message, please don't make it sound like propaganda, or you'll have completely messed up.

And please, be coherent, don't try to teach me about History and what happened centuries ago while you are silent like a tomb quieting about horrible events that are happening in the current days.

 

[The Firebird]

The difference is that 30 years ago, Wizards paid $25M for TSR (and Five Rings Publishing Group, but I'm guessing that was a fairly marginal part) and it got into the hands of Peter Adkison who was, all things considered, a fairly cool dude. Not perfect by any means, but fairly cool. Today, D&D is a part of Wizards which in turn is a part of Hasbro so it's kind of hard to detangle things, but I would be surprised if it wasn't worth at least 10x that for just D&D. There aren't all that many people who have access to that kind of money to spend on a whim, and I don't think I'd want any of them anywhere near D&D.

Assuming it is run into the ground, it would be available for a much lower price. But yes the risk of someone or some group buying it and turning it into an ideological pet project is real. It wouldn't be the first time. All things considered I'm happy with what Hasbro has done with the brand.

 

[AlViking]

I remember years ago back playing Living Grayhawk (3e), there was a casual mention of a lesbian couple. One of the players was extremely upset because this was supposed to be a "family friendly" game. He found that mere acknowledgement of openly gay people objectionable. I would hope we had moved beyond that and I still hope that one day we will.

 

[Umbran]

Basically why I said offend everyone. Art should be offensive imho.

Art can be offensive, and effective. But there's no "should" about it. There are other approaches to art, that are also perfectly valid.

 

[billd91]

There is a right and a wrong way to be inclusive. The right way is "everybody is wellcome to the table" and the wrong way is to ignore the old customers who aren't in the current VIP list.

Are you KIDDING me? I've been playing this game for over 40 years. I AM an old customer. And I can tell you that NOBODY is ignoring me. I'm swimming in nostalgia-oriented products from WotC and have been all the way through the 5e run. And that's great. I'm digging it.
And I'm all for WotC being inclusive because it makes my daughters and their friends feel more welcome at the table - and I can tell you that 40 years ago, they wouldn't have probably felt the same way. The difference between me and those asshats claiming they're "being ignored" is that I'm not fighting some dumb political war to protect white, male, heterosexual, cisgendered privilege. It takes someone defining WotC's general trends in marketing, art, and design as "ignoring" them to make it true - and that's on the asshats, not WotC. They're only being "ignored" because they willfully WANT to feel that way.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Sorry, in this case I wasn't talking about D&D but others, in general. Let's say my advice is WotC shouldn't make those same mistakes. I guess we could say D&D has been, comparing with others, maybe the most relativaly ideologically neutral TTRPG franchise.

But let's remember today there is a change or evolution within the entertaiment industry. Some superstars have lost popularity, some AAA videogames aren't sold so good. Each year there are less people watching the cinematographic adwards. The American comic is being replaced by the manga. A lot of consumers aren't very happy with some things from the current entertaiment industry, and if the companies don't notice and admit the past mistakes they are going to keep losing a lot money. We haven't to like what they want to offer us, but they have to offer we want. The people don't want to feel manipulated.

And some times when you want to promote something the caused effect is the opposite, something like when you hate a product because you are sick to watch always the same spot in youtube or other webs in internet. You need a softer way and avoid the possible saturation.

 

[Zardnaar]

Art can be offensive, and effective. But there's no "should" about it. There are other approaches to art, that are also perfectly valid.

You phrased it better than I did.