Thanks for the news link, Golaryn. Watching now, but I will say I can actually sympathize pretty keenly with one of the concerns Kyle raised early on from a Wizards standpoint. Companies like Meta or Disney or Amazon can, with the OGL, make "D&D Products" that run completely counter to what Wizards is trying to do to make D&D better for its players and the company would have absolutely no recourse to do a single damn thing. As Kyle put it, "we wouldn't even be at the table to talk to them about what D&D means". Considering the track record on some of these companies, I can understand how the notion that Meta could more-or-less straight up steal your IP and do something awful with it that you just don't have the mass to get out in front of because Meta shits more money than Wizards makes could keep someone up at night.
Also for those who despise Wizards and want D&D to fail: this is your interview, because this 3 Black Halflings guy is super hostile to Kyle. Like, he's stayinmg on the right side of professionalism, but kinna only just from what I've seen. He's excoriating the man and Wizards' decisions during the whole mess, so if you're on the "WIZARDS MUST DIE" train this one could be cathartic to you.
Those companies can already do that without the OGL. Amazon could legally make its own D&D (Beasts&Bezos) clone just by stripping all the story, characters, flavour text and illustrations directly out of the books, and no license is required. I wouldn't care if they did. I hope they do. The more the merrier. The game already belongs to everyone. So what is this IP companies will allegedly "straight up steal"?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron Satie
I think that everybody is tired of the "OGL 1.1 was just a draft" issue. Come on Kyle, this would be SO easy to put to bed, why don't you end this? Just answer these yes or no questions, we don't need additional detail and we know you don't want to provide details. That's okay, just a simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.
1. Did anyone (individual or organization) sign the "draft" OGL 1.1? (Yes or No)
If the answer is "No" then we are done. If nobody signed, then no harm, no foul. I'll let you call it a draft. I won't ask if anyone felt pressured to sign but did not sign. You win Kyle, it was a draft.
If the answer is "Yes", someone signed the document, then sorry Kyle, you lose. OGL 1.1 was not a draft if someone signed it. They signed it because they were pressured to sign the "not a draft" document and they were afraid of getting an even worse agreement. So followup question:
2. Have you offered to release anyone who signed OGL 1.1 from the agreement?
Sorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron Satie
I think that everybody is tired of the "OGL 1.1 was just a draft" issue. Come on Kyle, this would be SO easy to put to bed, why don't you end this? Just answer these yes or no questions, we don't need additional detail and we know you don't want to provide details. That's okay, just a simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.
1. Did anyone (individual or organization) sign the "draft" OGL 1.1? (Yes or No)
If the answer is "No" then we are done. If nobody signed, then no harm, no foul. I'll let you call it a draft. I won't ask if anyone felt pressured to sign but did not sign. You win Kyle, it was a draft.
If the answer is "Yes", someone signed the document, then sorry Kyle, you lose. OGL 1.1 was not a draft if someone signed it. They signed it because they were pressured to sign the "not a draft" document and they were afraid of getting an even worse agreement. So followup question:
2. Have you offered to release anyone who signed OGL 1.1 from the agreement?
Sorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
Do people not realise that you can enjoy a piece of media, while simultaneously disliking the actions of the creator of said media?
A good example of this is Markus Persson, aka Notch. He is a complete and utter transphobic bigot, and yet he created Minecraft, one of the most beloved video games of all time, and *the* bestselling video game of all time.
The only real difference here is that WotC actively took back their statements and actions, which in and of itself is commendable.
I think that everybody is tired of the "OGL 1.1 was just a draft" issue. Come on Kyle, this would be SO easy to put to bed, why don't you end this? Just answer these yes or no questions, we don't need additional detail and we know you don't want to provide details. That's okay, just a simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.
1. Did anyone (individual or organization) sign the "draft" OGL 1.1? (Yes or No)
If the answer is "No" then we are done. If nobody signed, then no harm, no foul. I'll let you call it a draft. I won't ask if anyone felt pressured to sign but did not sign. You win Kyle, it was a draft.
If the answer is "Yes", someone signed the document, then sorry Kyle, you lose. OGL 1.1 was not a draft if someone signed it. They signed it because they were pressured to sign the "not a draft" document and they were afraid of getting an even worse agreement. So followup question:
2. Have you offered to release anyone who signed OGL 1.1 from the agreement?
Sorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
That's it! Deny the truth and refuse to answer questions. That's a time honored formula for building public trust.
He did not make the statement everybody's claiming he did. ALL HE SAID was that he thinks there should be more room for diversity in the management levels of the hobby.
Did he word it poorly? Yes. Part of that was Kyle not being great at being interviewed, and part of it was 3BH actively fishing for racism on Kyle's part. There was none. All the man meant was that he'd be enthusiastic if, in the future, qualified people of color, femaleness, or LGBTQ+ status were promoted to high station within the company and helped bring a diverse viewpoint to it.
Everyone construing his statement as "WHITE PEOPLE SUCK AND SHOULD LEAVE D&D" is actively and maliciously seeking to inflict harm that is not there and was not meant. It's a really bad look to be jumping on this statement, makes people come off as actively caustic and also extremely insecure in their whiteness. Trust me. Y'all will be fine. White people aren't getting banned from D&D any time soon. All that's happening is all the other people who HAVE been banned from the game for decades are being allowed in, and y'all are just gonna have to accept that this is a Good Thing and will not be rescinded.
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
He does not say that there was anything wrong with white men, nor did he say that they should all go away - and purporting that he did is either misinformed or intentionally spreading misinformation. What he said is that he thinks there needs to be more diversity within the company’s executives, so there are different points of view represented and different perspectives can be taken into account.
That is a pretty normal position to take - a diverse set of executives tend to make a better product, since they understand the product from a whole suite of different angles, instead of just one particular perspective.
I think that everybody is tired of the "OGL 1.1 was just a draft" issue. Come on Kyle, this would be SO easy to put to bed, why don't you end this? Just answer these yes or no questions, we don't need additional detail and we know you don't want to provide details. That's okay, just a simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.
1. Did anyone (individual or organization) sign the "draft" OGL 1.1? (Yes or No)
If the answer is "No" then we are done. If nobody signed, then no harm, no foul. I'll let you call it a draft. I won't ask if anyone felt pressured to sign but did not sign. You win Kyle, it was a draft.
If the answer is "Yes", someone signed the document, then sorry Kyle, you lose. OGL 1.1 was not a draft if someone signed it. They signed it because they were pressured to sign the "not a draft" document and they were afraid of getting an even worse agreement. So followup question:
2. Have you offered to release anyone who signed OGL 1.1 from the agreement?
Sorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
I gotta be honest, I find the whole "they have to win back my trust!" rigamarole to be both hilarious and sad
WotC/Hasbro is a corporation. I don't trust them to do anything but try to make money. I also don't need to trust them to buy their products, if those products contain material I'll find useful in my TTRPG pursuits. Trying to turn their internal negotiations with business partners into some sort of moral/ethical crusade is ludicrous at best, and things that would get this post moderated if I typed them out loud at worst
"They have to win back my trust!" is just an empty slogan with no real meaning, and one that very easily allows the sloganeer in question to move the goal posts no matter what WotC does to respond to it
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)
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
I'm an old white man and I did not take Kyle's remarks that way. What he was saying was that, because there is currently a huge surplus of old white men in the corporate structure, D&D has plenty of room to welcome minorities AND old white guys. I think that's a healthy thing. The people wielding the corporate power should reflect and represent the current customer base. The customer base has changed dramatically since I began playing D&D in the '70s. D&D needs to change with the times. Who thinks that is a bad thing?
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
He does not say that there was anything wrong with white men, nor did he say that they should all go away - and purporting that he did is either misinformed or intentionally spreading misinformation. What he said is that he thinks there needs to be more diversity within the company’s executives, so there are different points of view represented and different perspectives can be taken into account.
That is a pretty normal position to take - a diverse set of executives tend to make a better product, since they understand the product from a whole suite of different angles, instead of just one particular perspective.
When I see RPG-related groups or stores I don't typically see many people of colour and yet POC typically seem to be at least as warmly welcomed as in other contexts. A question may relate to whether companies should reflect their custom base or the wider community.
Kyle, as a white cis male, said something of the effect that the sooner he could leave, the better.
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
Because if we were you, we'd think that agreeing with everything our friends say means we've won the argument?
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron Satie
All that's happening is all the other people who HAVE been banned from the game for decades are being allowed in, and y'all are just gonna have to accept that this is a Good Thing and will not be rescinded.
I think that everybody is tired of the "OGL 1.1 was just a draft" issue. Come on Kyle, this would be SO easy to put to bed, why don't you end this? Just answer these yes or no questions, we don't need additional detail and we know you don't want to provide details. That's okay, just a simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.
1. Did anyone (individual or organization) sign the "draft" OGL 1.1? (Yes or No)
If the answer is "No" then we are done. If nobody signed, then no harm, no foul. I'll let you call it a draft. I won't ask if anyone felt pressured to sign but did not sign. You win Kyle, it was a draft.
If the answer is "Yes", someone signed the document, then sorry Kyle, you lose. OGL 1.1 was not a draft if someone signed it. They signed it because they were pressured to sign the "not a draft" document and they were afraid of getting an even worse agreement. So followup question:
2. Have you offered to release anyone who signed OGL 1.1 from the agreement?
Sorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
^ Objecting to a diversity of thought and expecting exclusion.
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
He does not say that there was anything wrong with white men, nor did he say that they should all go away - and purporting that he did is either misinformed or intentionally spreading misinformation. What he said is that he thinks there needs to be more diversity within the company’s executives, so there are different points of view represented and different perspectives can be taken into account.
That is a pretty normal position to take - a diverse set of executives tend to make a better product, since they understand the product from a whole suite of different angles, instead of just one particular perspective.
Now THIS is a spicy take. Apparently working with those of the same skin color only ever yields a singular perspective...
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
I'm an old white man and I did not take Kyle's remarks that way. What he was saying was that, because there is currently a huge surplus of old white men in the corporate structure, D&D has plenty of room to welcome minorities AND old white guys. I think that's a healthy thing. The people wielding the corporate power should reflect and represent the current customer base. The customer base has changed dramatically since I began playing D&D in the '70s. D&D needs to change with the times. Who thinks that is a bad thing?
I googled images of rpg convention if you are interested in views within the customer base.
I listened to the interview they did a good job with the questions but I wasn’t particularly impressed with Kyle‘s responses and he didn’t seem to be in possession of a lot of the facts about what was really going on (or at least wasn’t telling). Very on-message with the corporate speak.. The „I only hire people smarter than me“ made me cringe….
^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
Because if we were you, we'd think that agreeing with everything our friends say means we've won the argument?
There is no "winning." As AntonSirius rightly stated, it's just an endless crusade that lets the enraged punt the goalposts ad nauseam no matter what WotC does.
I just watched the interview from the first post. Statements like the one in 49:25 are in my view inappropriate and frankly offend me. Especially that they come from company's CEO. Is there any WotC e-mail address of costumer support or something like that to file a complain?
3) If you are offended by his statements there is a very high chance you misinterpreted what he said.
How would you interpret, "guys like me can't leave soon enough"?
What is wrong with white men? Kyle seems to think they should all go away. why?
I'm an old white man and I did not take Kyle's remarks that way. What he was saying was that, because there is currently a huge surplus of old white men in the corporate structure, D&D has plenty of room to welcome minorities AND old white guys. I think that's a healthy thing. The people wielding the corporate power should reflect and represent the current customer base. The customer base has changed dramatically since I began playing D&D in the '70s. D&D needs to change with the times. Who thinks that is a bad thing?
I think that it is a bad thing. People should be taken to management because of their skills without looking at their skin colour. If you start to fire and hire people because of their race than it is racism. They can be all whites, all blacks, all asian, as long as they are chosen because of their skills not skin color. I don't buy "represent player base argument". I do not care/want representation. I watched "Curse of the Golden Flower", where everyone was Chinese, no even one white was there and I enjoyed it because it had interesting plot.
As aforestated, diversity hiring is not simply about “let’s make the group look as diverse as possible” - it is about “hey, different voices might bring different things to the table. If person A brings their experiences, person B brings something different, etc. then we can examine this product from a lot of different angles. Maybe Person B will come up with something based on their background Person A would never have considered, and their working together will produce something better than if it were just person A.” That very much is a hiring based on “skills” - specifically the skill of understanding a perspective no one else in the room might - rather than race alone.
But that, while obvious to anyone who understands basic empathy and the simple reality that collaboration is stronger when not working in an echo chamber, is something that certain elements choose to ignore. Those elements look only at the skin colour and not the perspectives of the individuals being represented, probably because those elements tend to look at skin colour only and not something deeper.
Kyle was speaking to the fact that they presently have an echo chamber - and that he would love to see something with more room for different voices.
Those companies can already do that without the OGL. Amazon could legally make its own D&D (Beasts&Bezos) clone just by stripping all the story, characters, flavour text and illustrations directly out of the books, and no license is required. I wouldn't care if they did. I hope they do. The more the merrier. The game already belongs to everyone. So what is this IP companies will allegedly "straight up steal"?
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron SatieSorry, they don't get a pass for that. It was not a draft no matter what Kyle says, even if no one "signed it" they were about to release the new OGL without feedback. Copies were circulated with NDAs so that people could not talk about it before the release.
I'm quite happy with Wizards' apology and their change of plans, but continued lying around 1.1 is a big mistake. Come clean, Kyle. That is what wins back trust.
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron Satie^ See, even the folks out for blood on this issue can't agree on what, if anything, might appease them. If I were them I wouldn't answer a single further question related to 1.1.
Do people not realise that you can enjoy a piece of media, while simultaneously disliking the actions of the creator of said media?
A good example of this is Markus Persson, aka Notch. He is a complete and utter transphobic bigot, and yet he created Minecraft, one of the most beloved video games of all time, and *the* bestselling video game of all time.
The only real difference here is that WotC actively took back their statements and actions, which in and of itself is commendable.
[REDACTED]
That's it! Deny the truth and refuse to answer questions. That's a time honored formula for building public trust.
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
"Refuse to answer" what exactly?
1. Did anyone sign the Draft 1.1 - irrelevant, it's dead.
2. Have you offered to release anyone from 1.1 - it no longer exists, there's nothing to be released from.
What is this witch hunt meant to accomplish?
He did not make the statement everybody's claiming he did. ALL HE SAID was that he thinks there should be more room for diversity in the management levels of the hobby.
Did he word it poorly? Yes. Part of that was Kyle not being great at being interviewed, and part of it was 3BH actively fishing for racism on Kyle's part. There was none. All the man meant was that he'd be enthusiastic if, in the future, qualified people of color, femaleness, or LGBTQ+ status were promoted to high station within the company and helped bring a diverse viewpoint to it.
Everyone construing his statement as "WHITE PEOPLE SUCK AND SHOULD LEAVE D&D" is actively and maliciously seeking to inflict harm that is not there and was not meant. It's a really bad look to be jumping on this statement, makes people come off as actively caustic and also extremely insecure in their whiteness. Trust me. Y'all will be fine. White people aren't getting banned from D&D any time soon. All that's happening is all the other people who HAVE been banned from the game for decades are being allowed in, and y'all are just gonna have to accept that this is a Good Thing and will not be rescinded.
Please do not contact or message me.
He does not say that there was anything wrong with white men, nor did he say that they should all go away - and purporting that he did is either misinformed or intentionally spreading misinformation. What he said is that he thinks there needs to be more diversity within the company’s executives, so there are different points of view represented and different perspectives can be taken into account.
That is a pretty normal position to take - a diverse set of executives tend to make a better product, since they understand the product from a whole suite of different angles, instead of just one particular perspective.
I gotta be honest, I find the whole "they have to win back my trust!" rigamarole to be both hilarious and sad
WotC/Hasbro is a corporation. I don't trust them to do anything but try to make money. I also don't need to trust them to buy their products, if those products contain material I'll find useful in my TTRPG pursuits. Trying to turn their internal negotiations with business partners into some sort of moral/ethical crusade is ludicrous at best, and things that would get this post moderated if I typed them out loud at worst
"They have to win back my trust!" is just an empty slogan with no real meaning, and one that very easily allows the sloganeer in question to move the goal posts no matter what WotC does to respond to it
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)
I'm an old white man and I did not take Kyle's remarks that way. What he was saying was that, because there is currently a huge surplus of old white men in the corporate structure, D&D has plenty of room to welcome minorities AND old white guys. I think that's a healthy thing. The people wielding the corporate power should reflect and represent the current customer base. The customer base has changed dramatically since I began playing D&D in the '70s. D&D needs to change with the times. Who thinks that is a bad thing?
Nathair Sgiathach is my co-pilot
When I see RPG-related groups or stores I don't typically see many people of colour and yet POC typically seem to be at least as warmly welcomed as in other contexts. A question may relate to whether companies should reflect their custom base or the wider community.
Kyle, as a white cis male, said something of the effect that the sooner he could leave, the better.
Because if we were you, we'd think that agreeing with everything our friends say means we've won the argument?
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron SatieWho has WOTC banned from the game for decades?
^ Objecting to a diversity of thought and expecting exclusion.
Please be kind people. Do you know what blood is?
Now THIS is a spicy take. Apparently working with those of the same skin color only ever yields a singular perspective...
I googled images of rpg convention if you are interested in views within the customer base.
I listened to the interview they did a good job with the questions but I wasn’t particularly impressed with Kyle‘s responses and he didn’t seem to be in possession of a lot of the facts about what was really going on (or at least wasn’t telling). Very on-message with the corporate speak.. The „I only hire people smarter than me“ made me cringe….
There is no "winning." As AntonSirius rightly stated, it's just an endless crusade that lets the enraged punt the goalposts ad nauseam no matter what WotC does.
Nobody said "only ever." Kyle is talking about continuous improvement.
How would you interpret, "guys like me can't leave soon enough"?
As aforestated, diversity hiring is not simply about “let’s make the group look as diverse as possible” - it is about “hey, different voices might bring different things to the table. If person A brings their experiences, person B brings something different, etc. then we can examine this product from a lot of different angles. Maybe Person B will come up with something based on their background Person A would never have considered, and their working together will produce something better than if it were just person A.” That very much is a hiring based on “skills” - specifically the skill of understanding a perspective no one else in the room might - rather than race alone.
But that, while obvious to anyone who understands basic empathy and the simple reality that collaboration is stronger when not working in an echo chamber, is something that certain elements choose to ignore. Those elements look only at the skin colour and not the perspectives of the individuals being represented, probably because those elements tend to look at skin colour only and not something deeper.
Kyle was speaking to the fact that they presently have an echo chamber - and that he would love to see something with more room for different voices.