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

[Scribe]

Fine, let me put it in D&D terms.
If one ideology is Lawful Evil, and it is opposed by a Chaotic Evil ideology, being neutral between them still leaves you Evil.

So Corporations, got it.

 

[billd91]

Maybe I should have said it with other words. D&D should seem ideologically neutral, or at least without ideological prejudices against any section of the consumers. We need enough diplomacy and delicacy to avoid possible troubles linked with the cancelation culture.

Some times there are "jealousy" because when you show support to a group then other feel "forgotten" or desplaced. You could be losing clients because these don't feel "wellcome"

I hope you see the problem here, right? If you try to be inclusive of more customers, other customers are treating that as excluding or insulting them. It's impossible to be ideologically neutral in that situation because one segment of the customers is making it impossible to do so.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

those people were correct though…

Yeah I was like "But but but...". They were 100% right if they said that! D&D was within inches of at least belonging to a bankrupt company and probably ceasing production for at least a while.

WotC buying it and doing what they did was, and I really hate to say this, almost an act of charity. Certainly as much an act of fan-ish-ness as a "smart business decision". Hell, the entire reason the OGL existed was specifically to prevent D&D "falling into shadow" as it were, or at least to enable it to come back as Gandalf the White. And Ryan Whatsit explained that at the time.

I have little doubt WotC-published official D&D will suffer some kind of collapse in the next 20 years. Probably sooner! But TTRPGs are unlikely to vanish (especially as computers advance less and less each year, not more and more), given that people who are playing them now at 25 or 35 will be 45 or 55 LIKE MOST OF THIS BOARD!!! And the D&D brand will probably come back too, because it'll be valuable for a long-ass time unless WotC really changes tack and completely runs it into the ground (and nothing they're currently doing suggests that kind of true "brand destruction" is on the cards - WotC may be Sideshow Bob endlessly stepping on rakes, but that's very different from Sideshow Bob, y'know, dying*).

* = I stopped watching The Simpsons in the '00s. I have no idea if they killed him off or anything.

 

[Umbran]

Maybe I should have said it with other words. D&D should seem ideologically neutral, or at least without ideological prejudices against any section of the consumers.

If you try too hard to offend nobody, you will also likely please nobody. Content that takes no stands also provokes no thought, and no passion.

The consumer can't suspect the artist or author could suffer some ideological prejudice because then they will distrust her and they will not want to keep listening her.

As others have noted, any time you risk losing customers who disagree with you, you stand to gain customers who agree with you.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you try too hard to offend nobody, you will also likely please nobody. Content that takes no stands also provokes no thought, and no passion.



As others have noted, any time you risk losing customers who disagree with you, you stand to gain customers who agree with you.

Basically why I said offend everyone. Art should be offensive imho. See Marge Simpson David episode.

I wouldn't over do anything though. Old D&D cheesecake art doesn't offend me but its kinda silly now.

 

[Gradine]

Basically why I said offend everyone.

Yes, we should offend everyone equally! That is because all groups are of equal status and stature in our current society, right? So making fun of white men is equally socially and politically consequential to making fun of transgender women, right? Is that how that's supposed to work?

 

[payn]

Yes, we should offend everyone equally! That is because all groups are of equal status and stature in our current society, right? So making fun of white men is equally socially and politically consequential to making fun of transgender women, right? Is that how that's supposed to work?

I remember being young once and believing this was the ticket. Then one day I thought really hard about it and listened to folks instead.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yes, we should offend everyone equally! That is because all groups are of equal status and stature in our current society, right? So making fun of white men is equally socially and politically consequential to making fun of transgender women, right? Is that how that's supposed to work?

I eas over exaggerating. I woukdntnt make content catering to chuds.

I woukd make Southpark levels of content or say Top Gun 2 or Mad Max. It would exist alongside stuff going the other way.

BG3 without the nudes bits would be as far as I would go and it wouldn't be across every product.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah I was like "But but but...". They were 100% right if they said that! D&D was within inches of at least belonging to a bankrupt company and probably ceasing production for at least a while.

WotC buying it and doing what they did was, and I really hate to say this, almost an act of charity. Certainly as much an act of fan-ish-ness as a "smart business decision". Hell, the entire reason the OGL existed was specifically to prevent D&D "falling into shadow" as it were, or at least to enable it to come back as Gandalf the White. And Ryan Whatsit explained that at the time.

I have little doubt WotC-published official D&D will suffer some kind of collapse in the next 20 years. Probably sooner! But TTRPGs are unlikely to vanish (especially as computers advance less and less each year, not more and more), given that people who are playing them now at 25 or 35 will be 45 or 55 LIKE MOST OF THIS BOARD!!! And the D&D brand will probably come back too, because it'll be valuable for a long-ass time unless WotC really changes tack and completely runs it into the ground

TSR ran it into the ground 30 years ago and yet here it is, still chuggin' along.

If WotC does manage to run D&D into the ground there's exactly zero doubt that someone will come along and revive it or, if necessary, reboot it from scratch. in fact, the biggest problem would probably be too many 'someones' all trying to rescue it at once and all pulling in different directions.

 

[Staffan]

TSR ran it into the ground 30 years ago and yet here it is, still chuggin' along.

If WotC does manage to run D&D into the ground there's exactly zero doubt that someone will come along and revive it or, if necessary, reboot it from scratch. in fact, the biggest problem would probably be too many 'someones' all trying to rescue it at once and all pulling in different directions.

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.