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.

 

[darjr]

You (hopefully) don't sacrifice principle designers in the middle of a redesign project.

Hopefully Ray wasn't.

I don't think he was.

 

[Greggy C]

What makes me laugh the most is that shouldn't wizards be good at telling a story?
Like, isn't writing stories their forte?

But no, they

• first try to gaslight us,
• then try a half-ass attempt to "connect with the audience" by telling the very short story of Kyle, who loves D&D.
• Now they have given up, and its just 4 points, "hey you lying b***** we are not doing this, or this, or this".

 

[Haplo781]

I think that's entirely consistent with how they've been managing things so far.

There is no 5D chess with these guys. They are screw-ups, plain and simple.

 

[Yaarel]

More on the record response here:

This tweet by Makenzie De Armas, who is a WotC designer, is worth a separate thread.

It mentions the UAs for Strixhaven as an example. It shows how a designer uses the feedback from UA surveys. The presentation of the survey includes "quantitative" approval ratings and "qualitative" things they "noticed" from the written comments. Things that get low approval get checked out.

 

[Umbran]

What makes me laugh the most is that shouldn't wizards be good at telling a story?
Like, isn't writing stories their forte?

It is the forte of the game designers. Not so much the leadership.

So, not really so laughable.

 

[Umbran]

More on the record response here:

It looks like D&Dshorts has deleted the tweet she's responding to, even.

 

[Haplo781]

It looks like D&Dshorts has deleted the tweet she's responding to, even.

Taking responsibility and walking back erroneous information? In the year of our Lord two thousand and twenty- three?

 

[Umbran]

Taking responsibility and walking back erroneous information? In the year of our Lord two thousand and twenty- three?

Well, the latter, at least. For the former, they may need to say something like, "Gee, we are sorry. We seem to have gotten erroneous information and, our bad, we didn't double check it before posting something that impugned the survey process' integrity."

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think that kind of seals it.

They wont budge on 1.0 OGL, they have their marching orders, and who cares if it spits in the face of creators and the industry at large.

I mean, of course this “seals it” (it doesn’t), from the perspective of someone who is completely convinced that it’s a hard fact, anyway.

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......

That’s never going to happen, couldn’t ever happen, and I doubt think even Chris Cocks thinks that it could.

But they will make a lot of money running a D&D-only platform that is the only platform where you can publish content for the newest version of the game, and if they wise up from the current pushback, they might even do something smart like using it as a platform to be the big tent under which other games reach their players digitally.

Like imagine one platform that combines dndbeyond, DMsGuild, and even stuff like some of what world anvil does, with subdivisions for other publishers to create and host their own play aides and 3pp marketplaces, all funneling 2% or whatever to wizards as the program host.

Instead we are going to have a rocky road ahead as a community, and end up more fractured than ever.

It’s laughable. They could have become the ongoing foundation of the TTRPG industry. They could have made themselves into the tide that raises all ships, instead of the biggest most ponderous ship, lashing out at all the other ships while verbally abusing thier own crew.

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

They can’t regardless, and we already know that they mean to build on 5e not make a new game, so…I think the (dumb) plan is more complicated than that.

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

I have a (cancelled but active until later this year) master sun, and you're only charged to share it publicly, which is a major distinction. The “leak” indicated that they’d be charging for hosting homebrew at all.

 

[Scribe]

I mean, of course this “seals it” (it doesn’t), from the perspective of someone who is completely convinced that it’s a hard fact, anyway.

The threads are fast, but AFAIK, they have oddly declined to mention it.

 

[Zaukrie]

(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.)

There were reports online that WotC is ignoring feedback. Should they not have commented on that?

 

[JEB]

so Disney makes them the Hawkbears instead

Funny enough, the second Maleficent film already had a legally distinct bird-bear hybrid (basically a raven-bear):

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

If Disney wanted to do an RPG for some reason, there's nothing Hasbro could do to stop them and it would get ugly if they tried. (Honestly, I'm always surprised at how many geek-friendly franchises don't have an RPG. Up until this month, making a 5E-compatible game was a good way to get some insta-sales.)

 

[Haplo781]

If Disney wanted to do an RPG for some reason, there's nothing Hasbro could do to stop them and it would get ugly if they tried. (Honestly, I'm always surprised at how many geek-friendly franchises don't have an RPG. Up until this month, making a 5E-compatible game was a good way to get some insta-sales.)

Honestly, "Disney makes a game under the OGL" is kind of a best-case scenario here.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The threads are fast, but AFAIK, they have oddly declined to mention it.

It’s not odd at all. They are commenting on a specific set of claims. They have almost certainly been cleared by legal to speak to those claims, which are directly within their wheelhouse, and tbh speaks directly to their character in a pretty insulting way.

 

[Scribe]

It’s not odd at all. They are commenting on a specific set of claims. They have almost certainly been cleared by legal to speak to those claims, which are directly within their wheelhouse, and tbh speaks directly to their character in a pretty insulting way.

I mean the general 'they' Wizards. Its been quite some time to say 'hey, we hear you on the OGL and we are going to ______'

 

[Yaarel]

If Disney wanted to do an RPG for some reason, there's nothing Hasbro could do to stop them and it would get ugly if they tried. (Honestly, I'm always surprised at how many geek-friendly franchises don't have an RPG. Up until this month, making a 5E-compatible game was a good way to get some insta-sales.)

Disney (Marvel) does have some superhero RPGs.

If Disney would want to leverage its fantasy (folklore) movies for an RPG, like Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Aladin, etcetera, with medievalesque witches, fairyfolk, genies, dragons, and princes charming, Disney can do it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There were reports online that WotC is ignoring feedback. Should they not have commented on that?

Jeremy Crawford did.

At that point, it does not matter anymore. I don't really believe all the leaks and I don't believe everything WotC says.
At this point I don't think walking comoletely back is an option anymore. There are people out there who will still jump at everythin WotC says.
Which is very unpleasant fot various reasons.

 

[Yaarel]

Owlbear, ravengrizzly (Disney).

Because Hasbro-WotC sought to harm the gaming community, its nefarious plan will backfire.

 

[Imaculata]

The best thing to come out of this whole mess is that competitors like Paizo are stepping forward to do what Wizards has now shown us they are incapable of doing. Does this mean we're going to see a mass exodus back to Pathfinder?