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.

 

[Reynard]

Oh, come on! You really think that they would stoop to "technically true" denials and that it wouldn't blow up in their face the moment they did that? There is no way someone isn't running Crisis mode over there and pulling a "sike, its 29.95" like a smug 12-year-old isn't on their mind.

I get you desperately want to believe DM-Shots, but he whiffed on this one.

I bet he has someone(s) feeding him info, but those people are probably not reliable. Unless they show up with copies of emails and internal memos. there just won't be any there there.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Oh, come on! You really think that they would stoop to "technically true" denials and that it wouldn't blow up in their face the moment they did that?

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.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Right. But they might be thinking that they need to kill the OGL to prevent others from releasing "owlbear" plushies. They want to rein in the word "owlbear" and the imagery. Owlbears, and gelatinous cubes, and chuuls, and bulettes and probably anything else that could appear in a movie or cartoon, and that would make a good toy.
But especially owlbear.

Which again, they're clearly not paying attention if they think this will stop that at all.

Three days after The Click put out his landshark plushie, Mango, Amazon was already full of knockoff Mannos and Gangos.

 

[Charlaquin]

They already have that, though. They have the Product Identity. Do owlbears not appear on their PI list? I know Gelatinous Cubes don't, but no one was beating down the door to make a Gelatinous Cube Jello Mold or whatever.

Gelatinous cube plushies, pins, patches, and all sorts of other tchotchkes are all over Etsy

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Gelatinous cube plushies, pins, patches, and all sorts of other tchotchkes are all over Etsy

I bought my kids mimic dice as stocking stuffers off Etsy and waffled on getting my little one a gelatinous cube stuffed animal.

 

[JEB]

They already have that, though. They have the Product Identity. Do owlbears not appear on their PI list? I know Gelatinous Cubes don't, but no one was beating down the door to make a Gelatinous Cube Jello Mold or whatever. None of their competitors are really in the toy business like Hasbro is. This was never a threat.

Owlbears, surprisingly, are actually open content:

Owlbear :: d20srd.org

Owlbear :: 5e.d20srd.org

That said, they probably could make a trademark claim on any image that looks like an owlbear from an official D&D book.

 

[Reynard]

Gelatinous cube plushies, pins, patches, and all sorts of other tchotchkes are all over Etsy

Gelatinous cube SQUISHIES, like you squeeze because your boss is being a jerk!

 

[TerraDave]

More on the record response here:

 

[J.Quondam]

They already have that, though. They have the Product Identity. Do owlbears not appear on their PI list? I know Gelatinous Cubes don't, but no one was beating down the door to make a Gelatinous Cube Jello Mold or whatever. None of their competitors are really in the toy business like Hasbro is. This was never a threat.

All those monsters I listed are in the SRDs, and therefore OGC. And it's more than just toys, but media as well, including cartoons, movies, and videogames. Under the current set up, i think, they can easily guard against, eg, CBS making "CSI: Waterdeep". But they also probably want to be sure they get their cut if Disney makes "The Owlbears!" animated movie... and the OGL may or may not be an impediment to that. IANAL, so I don't know.

To be clear, I personally am not on board with that, because by the rationales made at the time the OGL was released, I believe the intent was to make that stuff available, unfettered by strict corporate control... as it has been now for 20+ years already.
But I suspect that is what the suits are thinking at this point.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Owlbears, surprisingly, are actually open content:

Owlbear :: d20srd.org

Owlbear :: 5e.d20srd.org

That said, they probably could make a trademark claim on any image that looks like an owlbear from an official D&D book.

Did someone say "owlbear plush?"