Shoutout to Chris Perkins! I got to help playtest parts of 5E back in the day and he was the DM. Getting paid to play D&D is nice work if you can get it!
Good. WotC is wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Good,
WotCHASBRO is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.FIFY
WotC did some shady shit before, too. Certainly right improve since the acquisition though.
Aren’t Hasbro the villain moreso than WotC?
People have been complaining about WotC’s executive meddling in D&D and MTG for as long as I can remember, since before the 1999 Hasbro purchase. D&D 3e, mostly written after WotC acquired TSR but published shortly after Hasbro acquired WotC, was panned so badly that they dropped 3.5 just a couple years later. And 4e (including the first OGL fiasco) happened when Hasbro didn’t care about WotC because they were all-in on the Michael Bay Transformers movie. In fact, up until Stranger Things and Critical Role, Hasbro seems to have considered WotC the “Magic: The Gathering Money Printer” and done most of their meddling on that side of the house.
From what I’ve read WOTC has been a bad employer for a long time.
From my understanding, they used to basically be the same as Games Workshop is today: If you talk to people who work there “off the record” (or they are pushing the equivalent of a youtube channel… shout out to Rogue Hobbies) you’ll either get outright condemnation or LOTS of vague posting of a culture of theft and abuse.
But recent years have seen people get annoyed enough at the products that they now care about labor and we start to see a LOT more complaints.
Depends on who you talk to. I always thought the atmo was pretty chill. When I was there around 2010 as a contractor for a couple years they had a strange work schedule: 9-hr days Mon-Thurs and half day Friday - which was almost universally regarded as a screw-around day, along with at least half of Thursday.
Thanks for providing your view! I had only read the mostly negative reviews on job sites when I was thinking of applying around 2015ish.
I mean, sure, but it’s like pulling the WotC mask off a Scooby Doo villain.
WotC+D&D is like ~30-40% of Hasbro. The only other brand they have that’s worth a similar amount is (ironically enough lmao) Monopoly.
The problem for Hasbro is that, right now, the company doesn’t have that much in non WotC moneymakers and hasn’t had it for years. There have been attempts by activist investors to push for having WotC demerged from Hasbro so WotC isn’t subsidizing the rest of Hasbro. The across-the-board cuts were Hasbro leadership trying to placate investors, but they cut muscle and bone from WotC for some reason instead.
And Crawford is an incompetent smartass. I honestly don’t know what any TTRPG would have to gain from including him in the team.
If they hope to chase 5e’s success by following in its footsteps - piss poor adventure modules, nonexistent DM support, unbalanced player options, and a game designer that contradicts himself on Twitter every other post while attempting to explain why he isn’t wrong - then good luck to them, I guess.
I very much doubt that 5e became the juggernaut that it’s now because of Crawford. If anything, it’s despite of him - mostly because of the free publicity granted by things like Critical Role and Stranger Things, and DnD being the default option for anyone who develops an interest in roleplaying for the first time.
How much do we actually know about what Crawford is like outside of the WotC machine? He might be perfectly competent but held back by executive mismanagement.
I would put money on the downfall of WotC being exclusively due to being owned by Hasbro and their executives forcing their greedy practices onto the team.
WotC was already pretty awful before the Hasbro acquisition, as I recall.
Internally, yea, but I was speaking more towards the decline of their products, not the treatment of staff, that was being discussed in the top comment.
Crawford worked on Blue Rose, Warhammer Fantasy, and Mutants & Masterminds outside of WotC.
Ok, I’m not familiar enough with any of those to know what that means in this context. But in any case, weren’t his contributions to those games all ages ago? M&M in particular came out almost 30 years ago, right?
I really hope they’re not putting their weight behind Daggerheart long term. That whole hope and fear system is so unappealing.
long term
If you can remember THACO, tabletop games have survived needing to change a few systems in the past
I don’t need to remember it. I’m in the middle of replaying Baldur’s Gate 1. But that was more of a complicated math formula to derive something that we can do much more simply. The hope and fear thing not only reminds me of that scam curriculum in Donnie Darko, it also doesn’t feel like an interesting tactical layer; it does the opposite by interfering with initiative in a way that I’m not a fan of.
I’ve never ran it, but what don’t you like about it?
It’s rooted in the light/dark side of the force from Star Wars tabletop, and kind of inherent to Star Wars is making out everything in the world to be light or dark as though it’s that simple, but hardly anything in life is.
I have never seen hope/fear described as light/dark from star wars, and I’ve read the Daggerheart rules.
It came from here.
I can see why the comparison to Genysis would exist now but I don’t think it’s a very worthwhile comparison to make in how they play out and are used in each system.
I don’t think any designer has ever said it is from Star Wars, and it most definitely does not use them as Light Side/Dark Side or imposed morality. It’s inspired by the Genesys rpg system of degrees of success/failure and has narrative effects like “Yes, but” and “No, however”.
I’d seen it written up in other articles as coming from Star Wars, so perhaps it was that writer that was mistaken. I’ve watched them play, heard the rules explanations and such, and “yes, but” and “no, however” to skill checks aren’t solving some problem I’ve had in other systems.
Sure, it’s not solving anything, but IMO it’s fun giving the GM a tokenified response currency even though you pull off a success. I’ve seen a fair amount of backlash, but just feel portraying the dice mechanic as Star Wars is miles off base, when it adds a narrative prompt for success/failure (D&D does this with nat20/nat1).
I’ll grant you I’m not typically the GM. From your perspective, do you see it making things more interesting as a GM? Because as a player, it’s less up my alley, and the GM’s response currency without that system is whatever they want it to be, because they’re the GM.
It does, I think. It powers “lair actions”, gives powers like interrupting turn sequence, making multiple moves in sequence. When the GM has a pool of currency players can see, there’s an unsaid acknowledgement things are going wrong/badly, which helps fuel collaboration in the storytelling aspect. I can say that someone fails an attack, but on a fail with fear they miss the attack AND leave themselves open to a harsh counterattack, or perhaps lose their weapon. I can do all of this off the cuff in D&D because ‘GM said so’, but then the players can feel an adversarial relationship instead of collaborative, which is so much more encouraged in Daggerheart.
All entirely subjective, and at its core it’s still heroic fantasy same as hundreds of other systems and if you are put off by rolling two dice for metacurrency, it’s likely not for you.
Ok now do Magic
Hopefully they fix Daggerheart’s open-license. Last I looked it was problematic to say the least.
Same. I tried looking through it and was extremely confused by what I was reading.
I just searched for updates on the matter and found a Lemmy post with a youtube video.
You know, I’m not surprised about that, and not in a good way. CR is part of RPG culture I’m not good with, and I’m totally unsurprised that people who were part of 5e are joining them.
All I can hope is that seeing Hasbro lose people will draw attention to other systems - or for Hasbro to make a marketing push on the Essence20 system in addition to (or instead of) d20.
What do you mean by RPG culture that you’re not good with?
I too, am curious. I could totally be on board with this comment, or I could totally not be on board with this comment. I do agree with the latter sentiment. There are some very creative and well thought-out systems out there.
I’m sorry, I only feel like typing it once, please look up-thread, or here:
https://kbin.melroy.org/m/games@lemmy.world/t/995294/-/comment/7944352
Could you elaborate on the aspects of the RPG culture you have a problem with? I’m just curious.
The commodification and the desire for mass appeal are the top-level issues I have. I feel uncomfortable when I see the modern D&D branding on stuff in “normal” stores. It takes away the community and puts Hasbro in the central role, rather than the network of GMs who should be the majority influence. If I wanted a hobby with a company in charge, I would play Warhammer.
Now, on the community side, my biggest issue is with things I see as derived from CR. The lack of respect for simple theatre of the mind is a direct issue with the way I’ve always run and played since I left D&D. The tolerance and even acceptance of paid DMing also pisses me off in ways that make it very hard for me to remain civil.
Those are the big ones. There’s also the fact that D&D doesn’t seem to have the offramps it had since AD&D1 (and which admittedly went downhill when the Forge went out of the spotlight).
Paid DMing infuriates me.
Thank you for the reply. I was really into D&D a few years ago but my interest decreased when life shifted. I missed those days.
They got the good ones
