For the D&D crowd

[mirkwood]

 

 

 

 

 

[JohnsonJones]

I understand that they are coming out with a new version or something soon.  I've seen mixed feelings on it from the few who have talked about it. 

I get the idea that some of the things in this new version would not be things people on this forum may like, but I could also be mistaken.

Do you like the new version of this game?

[Ironhold]

5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I understand that they are coming out with a new version or something soon.  I've seen mixed feelings on it from the few who have talked about it. 

I get the idea that some of the things in this new version would not be things people on this forum may like, but I could also be mistaken.

Do you like the new version of this game?

Nutshell: the current crop of content creators and management at Wizards of the Coast are aiming for modern-era teens and twenty-somethings as their new target audience, the idea being that if they make the game flashy enough and "trendy" enough these individuals will automatically gravitate towards it. They're also trying to find ways to monetize the game, such as "pay to play" online game management tools. 

The problem is that both changes have begun to alienate older fans like myself who are frustrated by how quickly the new content creators contradict established lore and see no point in paying for what we can do on our own. 

Making matters worse is that individual content creators insist on driving wedges, whether it's mocking older players in official materials or trying to force various controversial & nonsensical issues. For example, one big push right now is to work wheelchairs into the game in the name of "representation", never mind the fact that wheelchairs make no sense in a game where healing magic exists and several people like myself with real-life mobility issues / spinal injuries / et cetera have voiced their rejection of the concept as insulting and demeaning. Those people who object are mocked and cyberbullied online by the sycophants who support the content creators behind this push, with someone literally telling me that my lived experiences don't count since they contradict what that person was expecting to hear.

edit - 

Note that this is on top of several existing controversies within the company, like how they sent the Pinkertons after someone over a box of Magic: The Gathering cards.

Yes, you read that.

The guy hosts a YouTube channel devoted to the game. He purchased a box of cards from a legit vendor. The vendor goofed and sent him an *upcoming* box that wasn't supposed to be available at retail yet because both boxes had similar assortment names. The guy did a video showing off the new cards. WOTC called out the Pinkertons, who sent some big beefy dudes to demand all cards and packaging ASAP. 

Edited September 17, 2024 by Ironhold

[mirkwood]

My main group has three 1E campaigns.  That group also has a 5E campaign and I play in an OSE campaign.  5E is fun, but is definitely is not what I would consider D&D.  WOTC is going woke and trying to push down the micro payment path.  I don't think that is going work.

[Ironhold]

51 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

My main group has three 1E campaigns.  That group also has a 5E campaign and I play in an OSE campaign.  5E is fun, but is definitely is not what I would consider D&D.  WOTC is going woke and trying to push down the micro payment path.  I don't think that is going work.

Between the Open License fiasco and the Pinkerton incident, a lot of folks are done with WOTC until such time as the entire roster is turned over. 

There are plenty of alternatives that people can turn to for fantasy and adventure gaming, such as Paizo and Steve Jackson Games. Folks are taking their money there and into the indie scene accordingly. 

If it were up to me, I'd introduce 7th Edition, a hybridization consisting of the better elements of 2nd edition and 3rd edition. I'd also de-canonize anything having to do with wheelchairs or other "trendy" but illogical concepts. 

[JohnsonJones]

On 9/17/2024 at 12:26 PM, Ironhold said:

Between the Open License fiasco and the Pinkerton incident, a lot of folks are done with WOTC until such time as the entire roster is turned over. 

There are plenty of alternatives that people can turn to for fantasy and adventure gaming, such as Paizo and Steve Jackson Games. Folks are taking their money there and into the indie scene accordingly. 

If it were up to me, I'd introduce 7th Edition, a hybridization consisting of the better elements of 2nd edition and 3rd edition. I'd also de-canonize anything having to do with wheelchairs or other "trendy" but illogical concepts. 

I did a quick google on the Open License Fiasco you mentioned as I do not know what that was exactly.  A Washington Post article popped up about it.

Open game license explained

It sounds sort of like Linux, except, for a game?  rather than an OS.

Ironically, it had this nugget in it (referring to your wheelchair statement above)

Quote

The OGL’s magic wasn’t just about money. According to designer, writer and disability consultant Sara Thompson, it made space for dialogue between WotC and the community, allowing designers to essentially offer playable critiques of problems such as D&D’s heritage of racial stereotypes, using D&D’s own mechanics. Take Thompson’s own Combat Wheelchair add-on, a set of rules for using wheelchairs as adventuring equipment that “allows disabled people to be empowered and see themselves as a hero in the story, because D&D didn’t allow for that.”

I'm not sure why this was such a big deal though.  If I created a recipe, or I bought the rights to a recipe, I'd want to be reimbursed for it.  It seems that WotC was wanting to get money for the rights they owned?  It looked like it would be for the game going forward (was not clear if it was also for things in the past, but I assume it was not, as there are various laws in place that should prevent them from backwards renegotiating a contract without the other parties consent already utilized in good faith).

Why would anyone be upset with a company trying to get money for their things they had rights to?  The 1.1 OGL seemed generous and allowed small creators to make quite a bit of money before even owing royalties.

There is probably more to this story than I understand.

[Ironhold]

11 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I did a quick google on the Open License Fiasco you mentioned as I do not know what that was exactly.  A Washington Post article popped up about it.

Open game license explained

It sounds sort of like Linux, except, for a game?  rather than an OS.

Ironically, it had this nugget in it (referring to your wheelchair statement above)

I'm not sure why this was such a big deal though.  If I created a recipe, or I bought the rights to a recipe, I'd want to be reimbursed for it.  It seems that WotC was wanting to get money for the rights they owned?  It looked like it would be for the game going forward (was not clear if it was also for things in the past, but I assume it was not, as there are various laws in place that should prevent them from backwards renegotiating a contract without the other parties consent already utilized in good faith).

Why would anyone be upset with a company trying to get money for their things they had rights to?  The 1.1 OGL seemed generous and allowed small creators to make quite a bit of money before even owing royalties.

There is probably more to this story than I understand.

Shortly after WOTC released 3rd edition in the late 1990s, they issued the Open Game License. This was meant to make their d20 game system and various elements relating to this system "open source" so that other game companies could use it. So long as WOTC was credited somewhere in the work, the other company didn't actually have to pay anything. 

In fact, there was an issue of Dragon Magazine, one of the two official magazines that were created in support of the game, that did a review of 20+ pre-written scenarios created by third party companies under the auspices of the Open Game License. 

For 15+ years, WOTC allowed the Open Game License to stand, and this brought them legions of new players as content became more readily available and people followed the trail back to WOTC itself. In fact, the massively popular online gaming series Critical Roll is produced under the Open Game License, and has become such a smash hit that WOTC itself retroactively made the campaign setting for Critical Roll an official campaign setting through an agreement. 

WOTC's "revisions" to the Open Game License would, ultimately, have nullified it. Instead of people being allowed to use things for free, there would be fees and percentages based on sales numbers and other factors. Smaller third-party platforms, and production companies like the one behind Critical Roll, ran the numbers and then had to go running for a dry pair of skivvies. 

This is on top of a clause stating that WOTC had legal right to use any material created by a third party without compensating that third party. 

Yeah.

A great many expletives were uttered and obscene gestures made as people told WOTC how they felt. Various groups that had relied on the Open Game License announced plans to move away from it as soon as feasible, while groups like Steve Jackson Games created their own alternatives that they in turn made available under a similar license. 

The backlash also caused people to boycott the live-action movie, which wound up being a hideous financial disaster. 

Put it all together and WOTC lost big time in terms of both money and reputation. 

[Still_Small_Voice]

Down with the W.O.T.C.  The Work Opportunity Tax Credit needs to go along with the income tax system on American citizens. 

I favor the abolishment of income tax on citizens and instead a small 3% sales tax on all items sold in America.

Vote no on the W.O.T.C.  😀

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

nice:

 

[tomasgreenro]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:26 PM, Ironhold said:

Nutshell: the current crop of content creators and management at Wizards of the Coast are aiming for modern-era teens and twenty-somethings as their new target audience, the idea being that if they make the game flashy enough and "trendy" enough these individuals will automatically gravitate towards it. They're also trying to find ways to monetize the game, such as "pay to play" online game management tools. 

The problem is that both changes have begun to alienate older fans like myself who are frustrated by how quickly the new content creators contradict established lore and see no point in paying for what we can do on our own. 

Making matters worse is that individual content creators insist on driving wedges, whether it's mocking older players in official materials or trying to force various controversial & nonsensical issues. For example, one big push right now is to work wheelchairs into the game in the name of "representation", never mind the fact that wheelchairs make no sense in a game where healing magic exists and several people like myself with real-life mobility issues / spinal injuries / et cetera have voiced their rejection of the concept as insulting and demeaning. Those people who object are mocked and cyberbullied online by the sycophants who support the content creators behind this push, with someone literally telling me that my lived experiences don't count since they contradict what that person was expecting to hear.

edit - 

Note that this is on top of several existing controversies within the company, like how they sent the Pinkertons after someone over a box of Magic: The Gathering cards.

Yes, you read that.

The representation of the combat wheelchair was particularly controversial, and some players felt that it did not fit the magical healing aspects of the game. Similarly, I would like to see updates in other games. I'm constantly looking for them on https://icasinoreviews.co.nz/paysafe-casino/ only reliable and trusted payment methods are available. There you can find something that really suits you, which is quite convenient. Ultimately, it's important to consider diverse perspectives to keep the game inclusive and enjoyable for everyone.

The guy hosts a YouTube channel devoted to the game. He purchased a box of cards from a legit vendor. The vendor goofed and sent him an *upcoming* box that wasn't supposed to be available at retail yet because both boxes had similar assortment names. The guy did a video showing off the new cards. WOTC called out the Pinkertons, who sent some big beefy dudes to demand all cards and packaging ASAP. 

This is why I’ve stopped supporting WOTC. They keep alienating longtime fans while chasing trends. The Pinkertons thing was the last straw!

Edited March 18 by tomasgreenro