3) They do read our survey comments (DnD_Shorts already retracted this one)
4) They will not be charging people to homebrew.
Posting this thread to signal boost their comments, please feel free to link it (or the source tweets) wherever this misinformation continues to surface.
Wait until you actually have something to riot about, people.
Might someone have proposed all that junk in an internal DDB business meeting as pie-in-the-sky ideas? Sure. Not everything that gets proposed is serious. **** knows I've seen/heard some bizarre shit in work meetings at my job, and I'm a grunt-worker cubicle bunny. I know the idea is to express concern prior to something dropping, but there's still a difference between concern and Really Intense Outrageous Theatrics. There was no way they'd pop shit like this during OGL Crisis, even if they'd actually had plans that way prior to said crisis.
It's hard to trust the statment when they keep up the lie that it was a draft and what they tried to pull.
That being said I think some of these items where a wish list from executives and not all something that was actually in process to come live.
There's a big difference between "being mistrustful of corporate statements" and "blindly buying into what's obviously a crock of shit." If you're going to withhold judgment re: those corporate statements (a good thing!), one would hope you'd be at least as suspicious of what randos on the internet say when they have no personal knowledge of the situation.
The "draft" thing has been explained by legal people something like a dozen times. Every legal document is a 'draft' until it's signed, and they're always sent out as if the sender is expecting them to be signed. Should they stop using that term because people keep mishearing it? Yes. Were they trying to strongarm people into signing the bad draft? Probably. But man I'm sick of people hanging their entire argument on the word "Draft".
It's hard to trust the statment when they keep up the lie that it was a draft and what they tried to pull.
That being said I think some of these items where a wish list from executives and not all something that was actually in process to come live.
I mean thats fair, but there were numerous of us on here and in other platforms that pointed out that "hey, yeah this is worrying, but there was a dude 6 months ago who played on our fears and made up fake slides, with all these terms, it might just be a hoax again, so be wary"
3) They do read our survey comments (DnD_Shorts already retracted this one)
4) They will not be charging people to homebrew.
Posting this thread to signal boost their comments, please feel free to link it (or the source tweets) wherever this misinformation continues to surface.
The "draft" thing has been explained by legal people something like a dozen times. Every legal document is a 'draft' until it's signed, and they're always sent out as if the sender is expecting them to be signed. Should they stop using that term because people keep mishearing it? Yes. Were they trying to strongarm people into signing the bad draft? Probably. But man I'm sick of people hanging their entire argument on the word "Draft".
It's definitely not the entire argument and yes it can be used as a legal term in that way but it's not the way they are trying to portray it. They want us to belive that it was a hay what do you guys think of this which it wasn't. It was a hay let's send it out with contracts and see what we can get away with.
I hope they put something forward that can start to regain some semblance of trust in the direction they are going. And yes some 3rd party youtubers have dramatacized the situation but that's to be expected when there livelihood is being threatened by a major corporation with lawyers.
3) They do read our survey comments (DnD_Shorts already retracted this one)
4) They will not be charging people to homebrew.
Posting this thread to signal boost their comments, please feel free to link it (or the source tweets) wherever this misinformation continues to surface.
Well, I am pretty sure they are misdirecting on number 2. Nobody is working on AI DMs.
I suspect they have subbed it out but you can look at an earlier post of mine why I think they are. In addition, they chose the Unreal engine for the VTT for a reason. It’s expensive for a commercial company to use it but has one nice feature most folks do not know about… Here is the link. https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.1/en-US/behavior-trees-in-unreal-engine/
Here are the first two sentences…Behavior Trees assets in Unreal Engine 5 (Unreal Engine) can be used to create artificial intelligence (AI) for non-player characters in your projects. While the Behavior Tree asset is used to execute branches containing logic, to determine which branches should be executed, the Behavior Tree relies on another asset called a Blackboard which serves as the "brain" for a Behavior Tree.
There is more but you get the point. If Congress had asked the military if any military soldiers were working on the stuff I mentioned in my earlier post they could have truthfully said NO because it had be contracted out to a civilian company with no soldiers it…
I hope they put something forward that can start to regain some semblance of trust in the direction they are going. And yes some 3rd party youtubers have dramatacized the situation but that's to be expected when there livelihood is being threatened by a major corporation with lawyers.
Youtubers were always covered by the Fan Content Policy, even under 1.1, not the OGL.
Well, I am pretty sure they are misdirecting on number 2. Nobody is working on AI DMs.
I suspect they have subbed it out but you can look at an earlier post of mine why I think they are. In addition, they chose the Unreal engine for the VTT for a reason. It’s expensive for a commercial company to use it but has one nice feature most folks do not know about… Here is the link. https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.1/en-US/behavior-trees-in-unreal-engine/
Here are the first two sentences…Behavior Trees assets in Unreal Engine 5 (Unreal Engine) can be used to create artificial intelligence (AI) for non-player characters in your projects. While the Behavior Tree asset is used to execute branches containing logic, to determine which branches should be executed, the Behavior Tree relies on another asset called a Blackboard which serves as the "brain" for a Behavior Tree.
There is more but you get the point. If Congress had asked the military if any military soldiers were working on the stuff I mentioned in my earlier post they could have truthfully said NO because it had be contracted out to a civilian company with no soldiers it…
NPC behavior trees is not even remotely the kind of AI people were referring to with regards to DMing.
I suspect people think different things when they say AI DM. There is no AI that actually thinks. It is all decision trees. If the end result is people playing without a human dm then what is running it is an automated DM and everything I have seen in the 6th edition changes from 5th points to that is what they are doing. We shall see.
I mean, I have a hard time believing that they have designers who account for feedback when they can't even fix features from year+ old books because "it's too hard to implement". At the very least, that isn't true on the D&D Beyond side (which admittedly only recently came back under the WotC umbrella) but if they wanted good will they would fix things like class features that never got implemented, pets and summons properly scaling with character sheets, etc. If the platform we have is literally not functional at the level that Foundry VTT modules can automate using modules made for free by the community, then why should we trust that it's anything more than an attempt to milk the community for money?
Goodwill is hard to earn back, and vaguely alleging misinformation and pointing to some difficult to believe arguments that are impossible to verify either way as proof that "See we aren't really the bad guys just trust us we're not doing this" is not enough. Fix the platform, listen to and value the community, and show actual changes then we'll have a reason to trust WotC again, maybe, eventually.
I suspect people think different things when they say AI DM. There is no AI that actually thinks. It is all decision trees. If the end result is people playing without a human dm then what is running it is an automated DM and everything I have seen in the 6th edition changes from 5th points to that is what they are doing. We shall see.
I get that, but the doc you're quoting is very clearly referring to NPC AI in a traditional videogame sense. The kind that, say, tell enemies in Call of Duty to dive for cover when you throw a grenade near them, or snipe one of their buddies. Not the kind that does natural language processing or machine learning or any of the other far more advanced things you would need for any kind of automated dungeon master to come close to being a reality.
One small problem. Every time. Every single time someone refers to a document sent to 3rd parties along with an NDA as a draft WOTC is stating in bold letters we are lying. We have lied. We will lie. Unless and until Wizards decides lying is the wrong path forward all the "misinformation" you claim above is qualified by the word "yet." But soon, that can change. The only updates to OGL 1.0a that is needed is to add the word irrevocable.
Kyle very clearly stated what their two core goals are. Merely keeping 1.0a entirely unchanged except for adding the word "irrevocable" accomplishes neither of them.
I mean, I have a hard time believing that they have designers who account for feedback when they can't even fix features from year+ old books because "it's too hard to implement". At the very least, that isn't true on the D&D Beyond side (which admittedly only recently came back under the WotC umbrella) but if they wanted good will they would fix things like class features that never got implemented, pets and summons properly scaling with character sheets, etc.
They got acquired and then mere months later OneD&D was announced. That is their priority, not fixing every bell and whistle in an edition that will be coming to an end in a year (if not less.)
30$ monthly subs, no one would pay that unless a significant chunk of pay for content was free to use.
A.I. DM's running games, dungeon crawls at best, campaigns in maybe 25 years?
Feedback on survey results, I would rather see a compiled document of the results than a video. Trust issues from recent events would allow physical prof to rebuild some small measure of that trust.[ PDF format would suffice].
"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!" Funny, free accounts such as mine can't add 3rd party homebrew to my homebrew collection unless I pay for a sub, or rebuild it given time and effort. I can certainly create and publish homebrew free for all to use if they wish, and expect nothing but a thankyou in return, but to hold that homebrew behind a paywall just feels [ what's the word ], Hypocritical.
"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!" Funny, free accounts such as mine can't add 3rd party homebrew to my homebrew collection unless I pay for a sub, or rebuild it given time and effort. I can certainly create and publish homebrew free for all to use if they wish, and expect nothing but a thankyou in return, but to hold that homebrew behind a paywall just feels [ what's the word ], Hypocritical.
Making your own homebrew is free, but accessing their library and search tools for other people's means you should probably be contributing to their hosting costs to maintain it.
I hope they put something forward that can start to regain some semblance of trust in the direction they are going. And yes some 3rd party youtubers have dramatacized the situation but that's to be expected when there livelihood is being threatened by a major corporation with lawyers.
Youtubers were always covered by the Fan Content Policy, even under 1.1, not the OGL.
You realize most of those youtubers are also 3rd parties creators right? Yes the youtube portion is under fan content but there kickstarters and other content they put out under the ogl isn't and is a fair portion of there platform.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
WotC has officially responded to the recent spate of misinformation:
1) The $30 price hike rumor is false.
2) Nobody is working on AI DMs.
3) They do read our survey comments (DnD_Shorts already retracted this one)
4) They will not be charging people to homebrew.
Posting this thread to signal boost their comments, please feel free to link it (or the source tweets) wherever this misinformation continues to surface.
See?
Wait until you actually have something to riot about, people.
Might someone have proposed all that junk in an internal DDB business meeting as pie-in-the-sky ideas? Sure. Not everything that gets proposed is serious. **** knows I've seen/heard some bizarre shit in work meetings at my job, and I'm a grunt-worker cubicle bunny. I know the idea is to express concern prior to something dropping, but there's still a difference between concern and Really Intense Outrageous Theatrics. There was no way they'd pop shit like this during OGL Crisis, even if they'd actually had plans that way prior to said crisis.
Please do not contact or message me.
Man, im so glad i was around 6 months ago when this rumor first circulated so i didnt believe it this time
It's hard to trust the statment when they keep up the lie that it was a draft and what they tried to pull.
That being said I think some of these items where a wish list from executives and not all something that was actually in process to come live.
"Draft" is the technically accurate term for what they were circulating.
There's a big difference between "being mistrustful of corporate statements" and "blindly buying into what's obviously a crock of shit." If you're going to withhold judgment re: those corporate statements (a good thing!), one would hope you'd be at least as suspicious of what randos on the internet say when they have no personal knowledge of the situation.
Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.
The "draft" thing has been explained by legal people something like a dozen times. Every legal document is a 'draft' until it's signed, and they're always sent out as if the sender is expecting them to be signed. Should they stop using that term because people keep mishearing it? Yes. Were they trying to strongarm people into signing the bad draft? Probably. But man I'm sick of people hanging their entire argument on the word "Draft".
Please do not contact or message me.
I mean thats fair, but there were numerous of us on here and in other platforms that pointed out that "hey, yeah this is worrying, but there was a dude 6 months ago who played on our fears and made up fake slides, with all these terms, it might just be a hoax again, so be wary"
i still contend the AI thing was a typo for AL :)
It's definitely not the entire argument and yes it can be used as a legal term in that way but it's not the way they are trying to portray it. They want us to belive that it was a hay what do you guys think of this which it wasn't. It was a hay let's send it out with contracts and see what we can get away with.
I hope they put something forward that can start to regain some semblance of trust in the direction they are going. And yes some 3rd party youtubers have dramatacized the situation but that's to be expected when there livelihood is being threatened by a major corporation with lawyers.
Well, I am pretty sure they are misdirecting on number 2. Nobody is working on AI DMs.
I suspect they have subbed it out but you can look at an earlier post of mine why I think they are. In addition, they chose the Unreal engine for the VTT for a reason. It’s expensive for a commercial company to use it but has one nice feature most folks do not know about… Here is the link. https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.1/en-US/behavior-trees-in-unreal-engine/
Here are the first two sentences…Behavior Trees assets in Unreal Engine 5 (Unreal Engine) can be used to create artificial intelligence (AI) for non-player characters in your projects. While the Behavior Tree asset is used to execute branches containing logic, to determine which branches should be executed, the Behavior Tree relies on another asset called a Blackboard which serves as the "brain" for a Behavior Tree.
There is more but you get the point. If Congress had asked the military if any military soldiers were working on the stuff I mentioned in my earlier post they could have truthfully said NO because it had be contracted out to a civilian company with no soldiers it…
That’s how Hasbro puts out statements…
Fixed a spot where I put in yes instead of NO
Youtubers were always covered by the Fan Content Policy, even under 1.1, not the OGL.
NPC behavior trees is not even remotely the kind of AI people were referring to with regards to DMing.
I suspect people think different things when they say AI DM. There is no AI that actually thinks. It is all decision trees. If the end result is people playing without a human dm then what is running it is an automated DM and everything I have seen in the 6th edition changes from 5th points to that is what they are doing. We shall see.
I mean, I have a hard time believing that they have designers who account for feedback when they can't even fix features from year+ old books because "it's too hard to implement". At the very least, that isn't true on the D&D Beyond side (which admittedly only recently came back under the WotC umbrella) but if they wanted good will they would fix things like class features that never got implemented, pets and summons properly scaling with character sheets, etc. If the platform we have is literally not functional at the level that Foundry VTT modules can automate using modules made for free by the community, then why should we trust that it's anything more than an attempt to milk the community for money?
Goodwill is hard to earn back, and vaguely alleging misinformation and pointing to some difficult to believe arguments that are impossible to verify either way as proof that "See we aren't really the bad guys just trust us we're not doing this" is not enough. Fix the platform, listen to and value the community, and show actual changes then we'll have a reason to trust WotC again, maybe, eventually.
I get that, but the doc you're quoting is very clearly referring to NPC AI in a traditional videogame sense. The kind that, say, tell enemies in Call of Duty to dive for cover when you throw a grenade near them, or snipe one of their buddies. Not the kind that does natural language processing or machine learning or any of the other far more advanced things you would need for any kind of automated dungeon master to come close to being a reality.
Kyle very clearly stated what their two core goals are. Merely keeping 1.0a entirely unchanged except for adding the word "irrevocable" accomplishes neither of them.
They got acquired and then mere months later OneD&D was announced. That is their priority, not fixing every bell and whistle in an edition that will be coming to an end in a year (if not less.)
Thank goodness they’re starting to address things relatively quickly now. At least they learned that lesson.
huh DDBeyond rumor response to recent chatter, and some interesting bits.
30$ monthly subs, no one would pay that unless a significant chunk of pay for content was free to use.
A.I. DM's running games, dungeon crawls at best, campaigns in maybe 25 years?
Feedback on survey results, I would rather see a compiled document of the results than a video. Trust issues from recent events would allow physical prof to rebuild some small measure of that trust.[ PDF format would suffice].
"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!" Funny, free accounts such as mine can't add 3rd party homebrew to my homebrew collection unless I pay for a sub, or rebuild it given time and effort. I can certainly create and publish homebrew free for all to use if they wish, and expect nothing but a thankyou in return, but to hold that homebrew behind a paywall just feels [ what's the word ], Hypocritical.
Making your own homebrew is free, but accessing their library and search tools for other people's means you should probably be contributing to their hosting costs to maintain it.