WotC Doesn't (Didn't) Understand the OGL

Hossrex, under your "profitable companies can do no wrong" thesis, how do interpret the current mortage crisis?

For example, take Bear Stearns ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_stearns ):

As of November 31, 2006, the company had total capital of approximately $66.7 billion and total assets of $350.4 billion. According to the April 2005 issue of Institutional Investor magazine, Bear Stearns was the seventh largest securities firm in terms of total capital.

After all that, Bear Stearns went out of business last week. How is that possible? Were they (a) "run by retarded monkeys", or (b) "misinterpreted", or (c) something else?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Delta said:
How is that possible? Were they (a) "run by retarded monkeys", or (b) "misinterpreted", or (c) something else?

Unless you mean to extend to the idea that all companies must be run by retarded monkeys, I'm not sure what this single example is supposed to prove.

It is possible that WotC doesn't know what it is doing, yes. It is possible - it is in fact impossible to prove the negative ("WotC is not run by retarded monkeys").

That does not change the fundamental question: given the extremely limited information we have on what's actually going on inside, which is the more reasonable assumption?
 

I believe he was trying to extend the idea that employment, even in a prestigious position, by a large and profitable corporation does not necessarily grant you knowledge beyond that of mortal men, which seems reasonable enough.
 

Umbran said:
That does not change the fundamental question: given the extremely limited information we have on what's actually going on inside, which is the more reasonable assumption?

Imban's understanding my motivation. Personally, I think the most reasonable assumption is (c) something else -- such as, for example, "WOTC executives are fairly smart people who are making a mistake in an unusual business context".

But I'm curious because hossrex says that's impossible. It's him saying that mistakes are only made by "retarded monkeys" -- and that's entirely not my experience, after working in a variety of game companies.
 

Umbran said:
It is possible that WotC doesn't know what it is doing, yes. It is possible - it is in fact impossible to prove the negative ("WotC is not run by retarded monkeys").

Sure it is possible to prove that negative.

Identify who runs WotC. Check if they are monkeys. If not then you have proven the negative. If so then you have to come up with some monkey cognition tests. :)
 


Orcus said:
L
First off, we operated on a "gentleperson's agreement" for over a year. 3E was out for over a year before there was even a formalized OGL and d20 STL.

Was it really that long? My memory has gone hazy but I thought we got the approved OGL out before the Monster Manual shipped....

Quick google search failed, and my ogl-l archive doesn't go back further than the first of 2001...

RyanD
 

Ryan!! Welcome back from your self-imposed exile! :)

I believe the OGL came out before the MM printed, because I remember WW's monster book beating the WotC MM to market.
 

Orcus said:
First off, we operated on a "gentleperson's agreement" for over a year. 3E was out for over a year before there was even a formalized OGL and d20 STL.

I think Orcus might've misspoken there. The OGL & d20 STL were available, it was the *SRD* that was a work-in-progress, under the "gentleman's agreement".
 

Delta said:
I think Orcus might've misspoken there. The OGL & d20 STL were available, it was the *SRD* that was a work-in-progress, under the "gentleman's agreement".
That's right. There were things in the draft SRD (monsters, mostly) that were later removed from the final SRD, but that publishers were allowed to continue using under separate permission from WotC if the publishers in question already had books announced that used those monsters.
 

Remove ads

Top