WotC WotC announces D&D Community Advisory Group

[Afroconan]

If the "them" is WOTC, that's not the case. Everyone was interested in this group being announced.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear (EASL). I meant that if it wasn't for "them" (the advisory group) they (WotC) wouldn't have released the product Road Map back in March.

At least that's the impression I got from watching NerdIMmersion's video on the topic.

 

[SlyFlourish]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear (EASL). I meant that if it wasn't for "them" (the advisory group) they (WotC) wouldn't have released the product Road Map back in March.

At least that's the impression I got from watching NerdIMmersion's video on the topic.

Ahhh. I can't speak to that. I honestly don't know.

 

[Charlaquin]

They have a similar thing going with the Commander format for Magic,

Well, they used to. Though it isn’t WotCs fault that fell apart.

 

[LaTia J]

Well, they used to. Though it isn’t WotCs fault that fell apart.

It still exists!

 

[mamba]

ot quite . New subclasses, new backgrounds, new species, new feats... Those are all player features. Domains absent 5e mechanics are easy. Like really really easy. What is lacking there is current edition mechanical support for carrying the not kitchtsink-FR themes and tones of Ravenloft or the specific domains. If such mechanics are planned, wotc has so far deemed them to be too unimportant to highlight with better page choices in any of the wiki-equivalent domain page pictures we've seen or even a mysterious bullet point.

monsters and domains may be easy (not sure new species are any harder for that matter), but they are still for the DM. By page count this is maybe 40 pages of player stuff and 240 pages of DM stuff.

Whether you like it or/ want that stuff is another matter, much like not every player will like all the player stuff

 

[mamba]

Personally speaking, I saw joining the advisory council as an opportunity to help steer Wizards to be good stewards of D&D and good partners in the hobby. That's my goal. I didn't know how effective I'd be in that role but I saw joining this group as my best shot to help with that goal.

agreed, anyone having the chance to join this and is interested in providing feedback definitely should. There is no guarantee they will do any of the things proposed, but it definitely is the best way to at least be heard

 

[Blue]

Let's also remember that this is just one small group of people brought to advise or give opinions on one small section of a larger company, which is just one company as part of a huge corporation. So let's not get too ahead of ourselves in thinking they are going to "fix everything" that people have problems with within WotC or Hasbro. This advisory group could very well have a positive impact on certain aspects of the D&D roleplaying game production... but have absolutely no impact on the greater WotC/Hasbro landscape. So things like getting 4E into the Creative Commons or certain mechanics finally appearing within D&D Beyond or the current core rulebooks getting released as PDFs could be so far outside this group's purview and in company departments this group has no say on that some people will start shouting "See! This group was nothing but just PR! WotC/Hasbro lied to us again!" if nothing happens on those fronts.

So we should all keep a level head on just what are the kinds of things this advisory group will actually get to potentially touch.

I think people see it as a step in the right direction, not a panacea that will cure all ills. No reasonable person would hold that up as the bar for what the AG needs do to be considered successful.

 

[DEFCON 1]

No reasonable person would hold that up as the bar...

You do realize you are on ENWorld, right?

 

[Blue]

You do realize you are on ENWorld, right?

Touche my good man, touche.

 

[Xenolith234]

So a few things about what it means to be on this council.

Yes, we're under an NDA. We're not under a non-disparagement agreement. My other posts here on EN World and the stuff I talk about on my videos should hopefully prove that point.

We definitely offer our direct points of view to WOTC. As stated in our joint statement, we have a lot of folks from a lot of different backgrounds and approaches with different takes on the game. That said, I haven't seen a single time where we were at direct odds with one another. The group definitely focuses on providing our honest and independent feedback to WOTC as fans of the game.

WOTC has changed approaches and decisions based on the feedback we've provided. Not always, of course. We don't dictate WOTC's direction, but they definitely listen to our feedback.

Personally speaking, I saw joining the advisory council as an opportunity to help steer Wizards to be good stewards of D&D and good partners in the hobby. That's my goal. I didn't know how effective I'd be in that role but I saw joining this group as my best shot to help with that goal.

It's easy to know the views I bring to WOTC. The same stuff I talk about on my show and talk about here on EN World is the same feedback I give to them. For those who don't agree with my take, worry not. There are eleven other people in the group with their own priorities and points of view. There's no risk that WOTC will suddenly shift their entire focus to the whims of Mike Shea.



That's definitely not happening here and WOTC is great at accepting the feedback without defensiveness or judgement. They work very hard at that. It doesn't mean the whole company shifts direction, but they're very careful to ensure we're heard without resistance. You're free to decide what to make of the whole council, though, of course.



It's easy to know what feedback I've given to WOTC if you read my other posts here on EN World or watch my show. Being given advice and them acting on it are two different things. And, let's be honest, WOTC's not going to steer a $130 million dollar purchase (way higher value now) on stuff we say about it.



Exactly.



We had to sign an NDA. We did not have to sign a non-disparagement clause. Again, that should be pretty clear from the stuff I talk about on my show and the posts I've had here on EN World.



If the "them" is WOTC, that's not the case. Everyone was interested in this group being announced.



That was the model for this. The Commander group seems to have worked very well for Magic and they wanted something similar for D&D. As you mention, they're not gagged about talking about things they like or don't like and neither are we.

I'm not sure how much you're able to divulge, but does the community group/you bring up pain points/lack of tools for DMs and is WotC receptive to making changes to that end?