WotC translation: Hey baby, we're still cool right? I brought a free adventure like you like. So.. we're still going to the movie? Also can you pick up those other 12 adventures for me. You know, money's tight you know.
Not resubscribing. I've only ever really played D&D and this has made me realise how many other systems are out there run by companies closer to my ethos. I will still play D&D but I am looking forward to giving other games a go
If we are going to get into who the investors are, you may well find pension funds, insurance funds, charity investments are all part of that soup of people invested in the funds invested in Hasbro and therefore invested in Wizards.
Let’s be honest here if you are against the big corporation then why are you playing DnD in the first place, why are you buying apple products, or Samsung. Or Microsoft. Go out support a small TTRPG kickstarter, help other game designers that are not Wizards or Paizo.
I find it amusing how many have come out crying that the OGL fiasco is an affront to humanity when they wear Nike shoes stitched in china. Or buy cloths from companies that use child workers in India.
In the grand scheme of things Wizards are not some big evil organisation. They made a mistake, people are allowed to, and they resolved it. There is no great conspiracy here and as a company they are far far more socially responsible then most.
Hasbro outsources the manufacture of about half of its products to China.
What I find amusing is that you seem to believe everyone wears Nike shoes and buys clothes the production of which is dependent on child labour. As a localist, I do neither. I know it might be difficult for particularly younger people to understand, but some people do shop conscionably. We aren't all hollering about the environment even as we spend an inordinate amount of time online or surround ourselves with needless playthings that are a detriment to the environment.
Yes, how dare a company that sells worldwide produce somewhere other than locally? But if you have these issues with international companies, why are you here on this forum at all? Why are you online at all? And suddenly all of this is about environmentalism? Pardon?
It was a simple and fair response dude. There's no need to go on the offense or get all exclusionary. Please.
We did win. But a lot of sore losers seem to be struggling with that.
Why is that?
There is a significant subgroup whose real motive is "destroy D&D" and just snatched on to the OGL situation as a convenient club.
The winners were those who rode through to the revert of potential changes in the OGL.
I'd have thought the "sore losers" ref, if anything, is to WotC honeys.
Back with the winners, a parallel group may well support systems inspired by the Gygax/Arneson-inspired S,D,C,I,W,Ch,d20 system but, as a breakaway club, it's certainly something I only joined since the OGL debacle. It's supporting a kind of D&D beyond.
We did win. But a lot of sore losers seem to be struggling with that.
Why is that?
There is a significant subgroup whose real motive is "destroy D&D" and just snatched on to the OGL situation as a convenient club.
Not that the group in question deserves the benefit of the doubt, but I believe they view it as destroying WotC and "saving" D&D...
Of course, their idea of what D&D should be remains stuck somewhere in the 1980s
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
If we are going to get into who the investors are, you may well find pension funds, insurance funds, charity investments are all part of that soup of people invested in the funds invested in Hasbro and therefore invested in Wizards.
Let’s be honest here if you are against the big corporation then why are you playing DnD in the first place, why are you buying apple products, or Samsung. Or Microsoft. Go out support a small TTRPG kickstarter, help other game designers that are not Wizards or Paizo.
I find it amusing how many have come out crying that the OGL fiasco is an affront to humanity when they wear Nike shoes stitched in china. Or buy cloths from companies that use child workers in India.
In the grand scheme of things Wizards are not some big evil organisation. They made a mistake, people are allowed to, and they resolved it. There is no great conspiracy here and as a company they are far far more socially responsible then most.
Hasbro outsources the manufacture of about half of its products to China.
What I find amusing is that you seem to believe everyone wears Nike shoes and buys clothes the production of which is dependent on child labour. As a localist, I do neither. I know it might be difficult for particularly younger people to understand, but some people do shop conscionably. We aren't all hollering about the environment even as we spend an inordinate amount of time online or surround ourselves with needless playthings that are a detriment to the environment.
My point was not about Hasbro but about Wizards of the Coast, who, as far as I am aware, do not outsource anywhere. I am also fully aware there is a small subset of people who where angry about the OGL but also make life choices not to buy from companies that make products in nations they don't agree with, and I have all the respect for them. However, I very much doubt that the huge cacophony of voices still going on about Wizards being evil for rolling back and making changes fairly swiftly do apply the same "conscience" based decisions to the rest of their life. Well done if you do, assume my comment was not directed at any one person, if it was I would have quoted them. I just find it really telling, and a sad side efect of the internet today that people just want to get angry for the sake of getting angry, which is what it is now.
We did win. But a lot of sore losers seem to be struggling with that.
Why is that?
There is a significant subgroup whose real motive is "destroy D&D" and just snatched on to the OGL situation as a convenient club.
Not that the group in question deserves the benefit of the doubt, but I believe they view it as destroying WotC and "saving" D&D...
Of course, their idea of what D&D should be remains stuck somewhere in the 1980s
I don't think it is even as detailed as this, the modern internet just has a section of the community who want to angrily bash a keyboard about something. DnD is no different, it is just the OGL allowed them to gather as a group behind it with the masses for a change, Wizards then made the change and went further then anyone thought, but those same individuals can't stop bashing. I imagine when the next One DnD release comes out they will finally shift to complaining about how Wizards are destroying DnD with the new rules lol.
We did win. But a lot of sore losers seem to be struggling with that.
Why is that?
There is a significant subgroup whose real motive is "destroy D&D" and just snatched on to the OGL situation as a convenient club.
I'd have thought the "sore losers" ref, if anything, is to WotC honeys.
The 'sore losers' ref should really be 'sore winners' -- people who can't let go of the fight even after winning.
Do you think that's what was meant? Maybe. But honestly, the only sores I've experienced are from (not here) attacks from those who hate having people with different views. Lots of polite clarification of attempted spins has also been needed.
edit: No sore losers is right. I lost a lot regarding my personal gaming investment through having now been disenchanted with WotC.
Not resubscribing - but nothing to do with the OGL fiasco, execpt that it got me looking at lore from other systems. This is what I found:
Paizo has rules on how to play disabled characters right in the core rule book, along with accessibility & mobility equipment in their "Grand Bazaar" book full of extra equipment of all sorts. Right next to the cannon non binary characters & other LGBTQ representation right in the beginner box I just bought on humble bundle. Not to mention a whole bunch of ethnicities (though non-human ethnic minorities are outside the core rule book). All without making any sort of song and dance about it. It just is and apparently isn't even all that new, whilst the Forgotten Realms & WotC are hardly explored at all in 5e beyond Tolkienesque stereotypes.
I may well come back to 5e/one D&D at some point in the future, but I'm not coming back to any WotC setting for a good long while - Golarion just feels so much more lived in, real and modern as a fantasy setting. Radiant Citadel was a nice book for some diversity from WotC, but the authors had to publish expansions on it's lore in DMsGuild. Having now dipped into Paizo's lore, it's so much better written & in depth.
You would see visually and audibly impaired players pushed out of the hobby if it meant you got your 21st-century computer graphics game engine update to the game
Depends heavily on what the computer engine actually did, plenty of options would make the game more accessible, not less (for example, it's a lot easier for speech synthesizers to read computer dice and text than to read physical dice and books).
Is it easier for players to afford all that hardware and have speech synthesizers do for them what someone else at the table could do?
Most likely yes? 'All that hardware', today, is 'a computer capable of running the app'. Or for something like DDB, a smart phone. And that hardware will have many many applications other than playing RPGs.
And can we not play that game where you just conveniently cut out about 90 percent of someone's response so you can tell yourself you've adequately responded to all they've said?
You had a quote chain (which I removed because exploding quote chains are a bane that should be removed) and some other points I didn't see any need to respond to as they were completely unrelated to the point I was responding to.
You do understand there are people who do not own a computer and that this is not out of choice but because they struggle to even afford food enough to feed their families? We all have imaginations. All it takes is one local kid to have money enough for a ruleset and the children from such families can play.
Yes, those people exist, though they probably aren't buying books either. If they were removing existing options there might be some grounds for complaining, but they aren't.
"Philosophical discussions took place in the 70s and 80s when table-top role-playing games were first emerging about what makes a TRPG a TRPG. It was certainly never intended to be about a token on a board or an avatar on a screen. It was about the worlds groups created and those who populated those worlds and how these were imagined."
I'd say that's worth saving.
This block got trimmed because it has nothing to do with visually and audibly impaired players.
Players young and old who try earlier editions of the game or games modeled on these love the old-school feel. Just because you lack the curiosity to even give it a go doesn't mean it's just us old grognards.
This block got trimmed because it has nothing to do with visually and audibly impaired players.
There's an argument that I shouldn't have trimmed That's not even to go into how expensive it already is without the need of hardware and how you'd make it a hobby for the well-to-do, but that doesn't really relate to visually and audibly impaired players either.
So you chose the one point about visually and audibly impaired players among a number of points when that one point wasn't even my main point?
Maybe you forgot that this was all a response to your saying some want to take the game back to the 80s. Remember that?
No, because I didn't say it (that was AntonSirius). I picked the point about visually and audibly impaired players because that was the actively bad argument you were making -- the rest of it amounts to "I like old school", which is a matter of taste.
So ... the below, informed as it is from a reading of The Elusive Shift and Playing at the World and other game studies, is "a matter of taste"?
"Philosophical discussions took place in the 70s and 80s when table-top role-playing games were first emerging about what makes a TRPG a TRPG. It was certainly never intended to be about a token on a board or an avatar on a screen. It was about the worlds groups created and those who populated those worlds and how these were imagined."
Pretty much, yes -- it's a statement about what the authors, or the people they were dealing with, thought RPGs should be.
Also: Put a visually or audibly impaired child in a family like the families I've described and it's not an "actively bad argument." What is an actively bad argument is yours, as it is dependent on the delusion that every kid who wants to play D&D is as privileged as you.
Which is better: "I have a choice of something that will make my game play experience better", or "I don't have a choice"? Yes, that thing that makes game play better costs money, but that doesn't mean it isn't a choice.
Those are both well researchedhistory books. That unearth the exchanges that took place between pioneers of table-top role-playing games. About the deep and philosophical discussions about what make a TRPG a TRPG and what distinguishes such a game from a video game and any other game dependent on an interface. I'll trust these more than I'll trust you provided you're not guided by either history or philosophy but some misguided desire to 'win' some petty argument over the internet.
Who exactly said those things is not relevant to whether it's a matter of taste.
You are misrepresenting what I said: I'm not saying there can't be a VTT. I'm saying—and even Kyle Brink hinted at this in his interview with 3 Black Halflings—there is every possibility that venture takes off and the printed game, and with it those who would rather make that choice, then becomes an afterthought.
I like how once again you've just conveniently cut out a part of my post so you can just respond to that and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.
Not going to respond to the point about privilege, of course.
First of all, if the venture takes off and the printed game becomes an afterthought: so what? If it does, it's because that's what most people want it to be, and in the end the job of a game is to be something people want to do.
As for cutting things off: take a look back at the above message? You may notice that I edited it before you made your post to add additional commentary.
I see changes where anytime I want to access material I now have to pay for it or home brew it myself. I have all the books, don't want to duplicate my purchases for online versions. So So I am curious, is this the way it will be moving forward, just monetize every access point? Cause as a DM for 40 years, this doesn't seem very appealing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1438-claim-your-copy-of-prisoner-13-and-infiltrate
WotC translation:
Hey baby, we're still cool right? I brought a free adventure like you like.
So.. we're still going to the movie? Also can you pick up those other 12 adventures for me. You know, money's tight you know.
Not resubscribing. I've only ever really played D&D and this has made me realise how many other systems are out there run by companies closer to my ethos. I will still play D&D but I am looking forward to giving other games a go
It was a simple and fair response dude. There's no need to go on the offense or get all exclusionary. Please.
There is a significant subgroup whose real motive is "destroy D&D" and just snatched on to the OGL situation as a convenient club.
The winners were those who rode through to the revert of potential changes in the OGL.
I'd have thought the "sore losers" ref, if anything, is to WotC honeys.
Back with the winners, a parallel group may well support systems inspired by the Gygax/Arneson-inspired S,D,C,I,W,Ch,d20 system but, as a breakaway club, it's certainly something I only joined since the OGL debacle. It's supporting a kind of D&D beyond.
Not that the group in question deserves the benefit of the doubt, but I believe they view it as destroying WotC and "saving" D&D...
Of course, their idea of what D&D should be remains stuck somewhere in the 1980s
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
My point was not about Hasbro but about Wizards of the Coast, who, as far as I am aware, do not outsource anywhere. I am also fully aware there is a small subset of people who where angry about the OGL but also make life choices not to buy from companies that make products in nations they don't agree with, and I have all the respect for them. However, I very much doubt that the huge cacophony of voices still going on about Wizards being evil for rolling back and making changes fairly swiftly do apply the same "conscience" based decisions to the rest of their life. Well done if you do, assume my comment was not directed at any one person, if it was I would have quoted them. I just find it really telling, and a sad side efect of the internet today that people just want to get angry for the sake of getting angry, which is what it is now.
I don't think it is even as detailed as this, the modern internet just has a section of the community who want to angrily bash a keyboard about something. DnD is no different, it is just the OGL allowed them to gather as a group behind it with the masses for a change, Wizards then made the change and went further then anyone thought, but those same individuals can't stop bashing. I imagine when the next One DnD release comes out they will finally shift to complaining about how Wizards are destroying DnD with the new rules lol.
The 'sore losers' ref should really be 'sore winners' -- people who can't let go of the fight even after winning.
Do you think that's what was meant? Maybe.
But honestly, the only sores I've experienced are from (not here) attacks from those who hate having people with different views.
Lots of polite clarification of attempted spins has also been needed.
edit: No sore losers is right. I lost a lot regarding my personal gaming investment through having now been disenchanted with WotC.
Not resubscribing - but nothing to do with the OGL fiasco, execpt that it got me looking at lore from other systems. This is what I found:
Paizo has rules on how to play disabled characters right in the core rule book, along with accessibility & mobility equipment in their "Grand Bazaar" book full of extra equipment of all sorts. Right next to the cannon non binary characters & other LGBTQ representation right in the beginner box I just bought on humble bundle. Not to mention a whole bunch of ethnicities (though non-human ethnic minorities are outside the core rule book). All without making any sort of song and dance about it. It just is and apparently isn't even all that new, whilst the Forgotten Realms & WotC are hardly explored at all in 5e beyond Tolkienesque stereotypes.
I may well come back to 5e/one D&D at some point in the future, but I'm not coming back to any WotC setting for a good long while - Golarion just feels so much more lived in, real and modern as a fantasy setting. Radiant Citadel was a nice book for some diversity from WotC, but the authors had to publish expansions on it's lore in DMsGuild. Having now dipped into Paizo's lore, it's so much better written & in depth.
Here's one of them, trying to type cast all non-WotC devotees as "stuck"? Please chill out.
Apparently people like me can't leave the game fast enough so I guess I won't be coming back to a place where I don't seem to be wanted...
Depends heavily on what the computer engine actually did, plenty of options would make the game more accessible, not less (for example, it's a lot easier for speech synthesizers to read computer dice and text than to read physical dice and books).
See https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/d-d-beyond-feedback/d-d-beyond-accessibility/124589-building-a-more-accessible-d-d-beyond-together
Most likely yes? 'All that hardware', today, is 'a computer capable of running the app'. Or for something like DDB, a smart phone. And that hardware will have many many applications other than playing RPGs.
You had a quote chain (which I removed because exploding quote chains are a bane that should be removed) and some other points I didn't see any need to respond to as they were completely unrelated to the point I was responding to.
Yes, those people exist, though they probably aren't buying books either. If they were removing existing options there might be some grounds for complaining, but they aren't.
This block got trimmed because it has nothing to do with visually and audibly impaired players.
This block got trimmed because it has nothing to do with visually and audibly impaired players.
There's an argument that I shouldn't have trimmed That's not even to go into how expensive it already is without the need of hardware and how you'd make it a hobby for the well-to-do, but that doesn't really relate to visually and audibly impaired players either.
No, because I didn't say it (that was AntonSirius). I picked the point about visually and audibly impaired players because that was the actively bad argument you were making -- the rest of it amounts to "I like old school", which is a matter of taste.
Pretty much, yes -- it's a statement about what the authors, or the people they were dealing with, thought RPGs should be.
Which is better: "I have a choice of something that will make my game play experience better", or "I don't have a choice"? Yes, that thing that makes game play better costs money, but that doesn't mean it isn't a choice.
Who exactly said those things is not relevant to whether it's a matter of taste.
First of all, if the venture takes off and the printed game becomes an afterthought: so what? If it does, it's because that's what most people want it to be, and in the end the job of a game is to be something people want to do.
As for cutting things off: take a look back at the above message? You may notice that I edited it before you made your post to add additional commentary.
I see changes where anytime I want to access material I now have to pay for it or home brew it myself. I have all the books, don't want to duplicate my purchases for online versions. So So I am curious, is this the way it will be moving forward, just monetize every access point? Cause as a DM for 40 years, this doesn't seem very appealing.