Nerd Immersion interviews Kyle Brink

[TerraDave]

What they should have tried was rolling out a new STL, but more attractive than the old d20 System one: if Keith Baker could run Kickstarters for Eberron with WotC getting a cut, literally nobody would have objected.

When the OGL rumors started pre-leak, I think we assumed something like this for 1D&D. All moot now. But this...

WotC never needed to claw back the OGL to make their walled garden. They just need to keep making DnDBeyond more appealing. An integrated VTT might help that, but I keep arguing that they should open it up to certain 3PP products.

And for those who don't want anything to do with a digital platform, there will always be pencils, papers, dice, and books.

Is almost certainly the strategy. How they treat other VTTs remains a big question.

For example, Roll20 just announced more integration of DMsGuild material. So still nice, so far.

 

[Parmandur]

What is the "STL?"

So, the System Trademark License was the twin to the OGL: the OGL covered copyrightable rules material (though it has always been legally murky where copyright sits with game rules, the point if the OGL was to make using D&D rules safe and predictable for everyone), whereas the d20 STL gave certain extra rights (like the "D20 System" logo) with some extra restrictions (like WotC could revoke STL usage for a product). The idea was that people would use both, but the STL did not last the same wY, and was clearly revocable, so WotC revoked it when 4E dropped.

If they brought back the trademark license with some more goidie, like DMsGuild style access to TSR and WotC material, people would not complain if WotC required a cut and could cancel access.

 

[Yaarel]

A great interview by both Ted Sikora (Nerd Immersion) and Kyle Brink (WotC).

The responses by Brink came across as genuine, with comments that rang true. (The 5e designers had nothing to do with the ap-OGL-ypse. WotC realized in hindsight that the original OGL and its SRD content are inherently safe for WotC branding. The consumers of D&D products are inherently all "creatives", and to support creatives is the best way to build the WotC brand − rather than imposing a structure that privileges WotC control. To be a creative among other creatives is the best business strategy. And so on.)

At the same time, the occasional skepticism by Sikora about certain spins felt measured and fair. (Such as: Doubting the decision to change the OGL was about purely about ethical content or changing technologies. Noting the closer relationship between WotC executives and D&D designers might prove to be good or bad.)

It was wise for Brink to seek out an interview by Sikora, who was vocally critical of WotC. Sikora handled the interview responsibly and constructively.

Both are a credit to the 5e community.

 

[Condiments]

To be honest, I have no issue with this. DnD (the brand) is severely under-monetized IMO. The question is not should it be more monetized, but how it should be monetized.

I don't think that is a bad take. It doesn't serve anyone being too uncharitable given WotC's recent moves regarding the OGL. For anyone looking for hope, the future definitely looks brighter than it did a month ago.

If the videogame industry is any evidence, there is a lot to be worried about with modern trends of digital monetization. While WotC certainly has a chance to expand their brand in all sorts of ways that aren't actively anti-consumer, the temptation to follow a lot of modern trends is hard for them to ignore.

While its nice to think the good guys won within WotC, I don't know how much of this is just good PR. From what I've heard from people who have links with people on the inside, like Stephen Glicker from Roll from Combat, their larger strategy remains the same. Which is a greater push for digital with microtransactions associated with their VTT and digital tools. A lot of the people here just aren't their target demographic anymore.

Now we can just ignore these things, and continue to play with our preferred ways. But I think it serves to be wary of WotC's D&Done strategy going forward.

 

[Parmandur]

I don't think that is a bad take. It doesn't serve anyone being too uncharitable given WotC's recent moves regarding the OGL. For anyone looking for hope, the future definitely looks brighter than it did a month ago.

If the videogame industry is any evidence, there is a lot to be worried about with modern trends of digital monetization. While WotC certainly has a chance to expand their brand in all sorts of ways that aren't actively anti-consumer, the temptation to follow a lot of modern trends is hard for them to ignore.

While its nice to think the good guys won within WotC, I don't know how much of this is just good PR. From what I've heard from people who have links with people on the inside, like Stephen Glicker from Roll from Combat, their larger strategy remains the same. Which is a greater push for digital with microtransactions associated with their VTT and digital tools. A lot of the people here just aren't their target demographic anymore.

Now we can just ignore these things, and continue to play with our preferred ways. But I think it serves to be wary of WotC's D&Done strategy going forward.

Honestly, if people want to buy special digital dice for Beyond, or personalized minis for the VTT...so what?

 

[Condiments]

Honestly, if people want to buy special digital dice for Beyond, or personalized minis for the VTT...so what?

If that is the extent of their monetization strategy than that isn't exactly bad is it?

However, I think we need to be realistic about how far this could go, and how much this could affect the game and brand as whole. Here are potential examples:

• Exclusive content like subclasses, spells, and magic items available through their VTT or D&D Beyond Services
• Increasing emphasis of AP design around VTT uses and limitations to facilitate further online play. I think AI DMs are too far fetched of a concept, but AI assistance or automation is certainly possible. They even develop module adventures that are automated for players without a DM like a videogame.
• Microtransactions associated with their VTT like assets for adventure creation for DMs, custom dice, hero tokens, etc.
• Increasingly monetization strategies that target "whales" to the detriment of the larger consumer base(like the $1000 MTG pack, evidence of a larger strategy trend within WotC)
• Closed garden approach that further minimizes the influence of third party brands as integration with their VTT is difficult to implement which is the central pillar of this edition.

This larger strategy can be largely ignored if you're just purchasing the books and playing the game with your friends. However, these types of groups will be a smaller prioritization of WotC with their push towards digital.

 

[Parmandur]

If that is the extent of their monetization strategy than that isn't exactly bad is it?

However, I think we need to be realistic about how far this could go, and how much this could affect the game and brand as whole. Here are potential examples:

• Exclusive content like subclasses, spells, and magic items available through their VTT or D&D Beyond Services
• Increasing emphasis of AP design around VTT uses and limitations to facilitate further online play. I think AI DMs are too far fetched of a concept, but AI assistance or automation is certainly possible. They even develop module adventures that are automated for players without a DM like a videogame.
• Microtransactions associated with their VTT like assets for adventure creation for DMs, custom dice, hero tokens, etc.
• Increasingly monetization strategies that target "whales" to the detriment of the larger consumer base(like the $1000 MTG pack, evidence of a larger strategy trend within WotC)
• Closed garden approach that further minimizes the influence of third party brands as integration with their VTT is difficult to implement which is the central pillar of this edition.

This larger strategy can be largely ignored if you're just purchasing the books and playing the game with your friends. However, these types of groups will be a smaller prioritization of WotC with their push towards digital.

Yeah, none of that is going to make me lose sleep at night.

 

[Yaarel]

What I suspect WotC realized in hindsight, is the content in the 5e SRD (being game rules and public content) is mostly uncopyrightable, anyway.

On the other hand, to make the 5e SRD easy for others to access helps others support and propagate the 5e gaming system − which ultimately keeps the WotC products relevant.

This is the original vision of the OGL and its SRD in the first place, and is working as intended.


Meanwhile. The stuff that WotC can control via trademark and copyright such as logos and stories is precisely what WotC needs for brand recognition and brand licensing. For example, most of the content in the upcoming movie is fully copyrightable, such as characters and fantasy locales.

The goals of "branding" dont need to control words like "Fighter class" or procedures to roll a d20.

WotC realized in hindsight, how cleanly the content of the SRD separates away from the content in the "branding".

 

[Parmandur]

What I suspect WotC realized in hindsight, is the content in the 5e SRD (being game rules and public content) is mostly uncopyrightable, anyway.

On the other hand, to make the 5e SRD easy for others to access helps others support and propagate the 5e gaming system − which ultimately keeps the WotC products relevant.

This is the original vision of the OGL and its SRD in the first place, and is working as intended.


Meanwhile. The stuff that WotC can control via trademark and copyright such as logos and stories is precisely what WotC needs for brand recognition and brand licensing. For example, most of the content in the upcoming movie is fully copyrightable, such as characters and fantasy locales.

The goals of "branding" dont need to control words like "Fighter class" or procedures to roll a d20.

WotC realized in hindsight, how cleanly the content of the SRD separates away from the content in the "branding".

Yeah, the Forgotten Realms.or Dragonlance are far more central.to any media endeavor Tham anything thst is detailed in the SRD.

 

[Retreater]

Honestly, if people want to buy special digital dice for Beyond, or personalized minis for the VTT...so what?

I'm not concerned about the aesthetics. I'm worried about having to assemble what you can have in your VTT games piecemeal.
For example, the black dragon featured in the reveal trailer. One of the designers was saying that you buy pre-made modules and then you can use the assets to create your own game.
In my mind, this is like buying a "black dragon lair" adventure. Then later you have access to the stats for a black dragon and can include it in a game. So you are gradually building up a traditional Monster Manual for the VTT, probably for hundreds of dollars of individual transactions as opposed to buying (for example) the Monster Manual for $30 on Roll20.
Granted, this is MUCH less of a concern now that we know they're leaving the other VTTs alone. Because if this was going to be the only way to play the game online, I'd have to be out. Not only because of the cost, but also because we'd likely be waiting years for them to release all the creatures we're used to accessing for adventures.