WotC: We Are Not Making AI Dungeon Masters

Adding to the recent spate of YouTube-based claims about WotC's plans for Dungeons & Dragons were some additional claims -- (a) that D&D Beyond would have $30 subscription fee; (b) that homebrew content would not be permitted on lower tiers; and (c) that DDB was actively working on AI Dungeon Masters.

Some of this was based on a (long ago debunked) slide from a presentation last year.

WotC has made some clarifications:

Hey, everyone. We’ve seen misinformation popping up, and want to address it directly so we can dispel your concerns.

Rumors of a $30 subscription fee are false.

No one at Wizards is working on AI DMs. We love our human DMs too much. If you’re looking for a DM, we suggest heading to our Discord where DMs and parties are looking for players.

We have designers whose core job it is to compile, analyze, and then act upon your feedback. Your feedback has made the game better over the past decade, and your feedback is central to D&D’s future.

Homebrewing is core to D&D Beyond. It's not going away, and we're not going to charge you for it. Your homebrew is, and always will be, yours. We’ve always been excited to see your creations both on and off D&D Beyond!

There is still no clear statement regarding the Open Gaming License v1.0a, however.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Wow, Jeremy Crawford is posting about the survey thing. Yet he's been silent on the OGL for weeks.

this effects him... if we distrust the surveys it directly effects his job.

 

[Reynard]

WotC intern: "ChatGPT, please write an AI DM app to be used in our D&D VTT."
Done!

Oh, geez, it's the singularity already.

 

[Scribe]

just the other day when my fiancé asked how much I spent on the groceries I said "I kept it below $100" and she INSTANTLY shot back "That could be 99.99 from you tell me what you spent..."
(if it matters it was like $78)

I know that pain. I always round (time, costs, whatever) because largely, I do not care. My wife always wants exact figures...SMH.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

WotC intern: "ChatGPT, please write an AI DM app to be used in our D&D VTT."
Done!

I played with it and it wont write a new AI... thank god, I am not ready for the singularity

 

[Zaukrie]

Yes, but all that matters to me is their intent to nullify the OGL. And they’re not denying that.

It's literally not about that. This is about another topic

 

[ThrorII]

$30 monthly subscription is ridiculous. It's going to be $29.95.

And of course no one at WotC is working on an AI DM. They've contracted an outside company with programming expertise in AI chatbots to do that.

This man understands CorpSpeak.

In all fairness, I really don't think WotC cares about 3PP and the OSR movement. It is chump change. I really think this is about their business plan for a WoW-ification of D&D (VTTs, microtransactions, online only play, etc.). They want a virtual only D&D (no printing, no owning of books, no face-to-face paper and pencil play). They just don't know exactly how to wall off 1D&D from the rest of the OGL......

If 5.5e/6e/1D&D is too similar to 5e, then the OGL applies and they can't wall it off.

 

[Riley]

It's literally not about that. This is about another topic

(I simply noted that this careful denial of several rumors does NOT deny what I see as the core rumor/plan. Your mileage, of course, may vary.)

"Please, look at all the pretty chaff. Doesn't it make you want to forget about the OGL?"

 

[J.Quondam]

This man understands CorpSpeak.

In all fairness, I really don't think WotC cares about 3PP and the OSR movement. It is chump change. I really think this is about their business plan for a WoW-ification of D&D (VTTs, microtransactions, online only play, etc.). They want a virtual only D&D (no printing, no owning of books, no face-to-face paper and pencil play). They just don't know exactly how to wall off 1D&D from the rest of the OGL......

If 5.5e/6e/1D&D is too similar to 5e, then the OGL applies and they can't wall it off.

Even more specifically, maybe they just want to corral "visible" (read: "marketable") game elements the like spells and monsters, especially really iconic things like gelatinous cube and drow. The actual rules probably don't matter a whole lot to them.

I've said it half-jokingly elsewhere, but I bet they really do want to corner the market on owlbear plushies.
.

 

[JEB]

It's a whole thread. I'll try to get it all capped.
My trust in wotc is very low.

Links embedded in the images.

View attachment 273044
View attachment 273045

Regarding that last point: I thought they already charged for sharing homebrew outside of your campaign group?

 

[Greggy C]

this effects him... if we distrust the surveys it directly effects his job.

It's important to note that "writing by committee" can also have negative connotations, as it can lead to a lack of clear vision or direction, and a final product that is a compromise rather than a cohesive work.

chatgbt.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Wow, Jeremy Crawford is posting about the survey thing. Yet he's been silent on the OGL for weeks.

The OGL thing isn't on him.

People saying he doesn't care about 1D&D feedback is something he might understandably take personally.

 

[Greggy C]

I am so bummed, I would have paid for that and forgiven them for all their other sins.

 

[darjr]

Regarding that last point: I thought they already charged for sharing homebrew outside of your campaign group?

This I don't know.

 

[humble minion]

I thoroughly believe them on the AI DM thing, at least. It's been pretty well established for some days that this is a misread/typo of AL (ie, Adventurer's League) DM, but it's gotten a frustrating life of its own because people keep amplifying it. A bit like that rubbish about Knights of the Old Republic a fortnight ago.

As for the rest - well, we'll wait and see. Even once the new OGL draft is released it won't include D&D Beyond pricing structure though, so we might be waiting for a while.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

View attachment 273055

I am so bummed, I would have paid for that and forgiven them for all their other sins.

Wait a few years. Someone will offer that. But the technology isn't there yet, and if it was, WotC certainly wouldn't be able to afford it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

As long as their message isn't "We wanted to clear the air: Just to be clear - We WON! And don't you forget it!"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The OGL thing isn't on him.

People saying he doesn't care about 1D&D feedback is something he might understandably take personally.

not to mention he has no good answer about the OGL (No matter what he really thinks) if he speaks for 3pp against his company that looks bad. If he speaks up for his company against the others it looks bad. He has a no win scenario about the OGL.

 

[Oofta]

Wow, Jeremy Crawford is posting about the survey thing. Yet he's been silent on the OGL for weeks.

Crawford probably has no say in this. In addition, companies typically have pretty strict rules for public communications.

I'd be surprised if we ever find out what he really thinks.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Crawford probably has no say in this. In addition, companies typically have pretty strict rules for public communications.

I'd be surprised if we ever find out what he really thinks.

if we do it will be when he is ready to retire (if he's smart)

 

[The Stray]

Even more specifically, maybe they just want to corral "visible" (read: "marketable") game elements the like spells and monsters, especially really iconic things like gelatinous cube and drow. The actual rules probably don't matter a whole lot to them.

I've said it half-jokingly elsewhere, but I bet they really do want to corner the market on owlbear plushies.
.

I'd LOVE an owlbear plushie. They don't need to kill the OGL to release those, though.