Quote from: Dispotatic254 on March 04, 2023, 11:52:44 AM

Quote from: Valatar on March 03, 2023, 11:49:30 PM
It doesn't matter.  The good 2e properties would just be ruined if current WotC tried to make them, it's better for everyone involved if we don't get more travesties like the 5e Spelljammer.  Can you just imagine how badly they'd fuck up Dark Sun or Planescape?

On that note, you've misspelled "transvestites."

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 04, 2023, 12:35:01 PM

Quote from: Dispotatic254 on March 04, 2023, 11:52:44 AM

Quote from: Valatar on March 03, 2023, 11:49:30 PM
It doesn't matter.  The good 2e properties would just be ruined if current WotC tried to make them, it's better for everyone involved if we don't get more travesties like the 5e Spelljammer.  Can you just imagine how badly they'd fuck up Dark Sun or Planescape?

On that note, you've misspelled "transvestites."

My apologies, I have misspelled "Decepticons."

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 01:30:26 PM

Quote from: Dapig on March 01, 2023, 10:31:17 PM
Thanks for this.  So what they are saying is that my white kids who game with me
In our basement should shove off?

Hey, Dapig. We had a thread on this a few weeks ago. Here's my transcript of that part of the interview, which started with the acknowledgement that 100% of the D&D management positions were white men.

QuoteJeremy Cobb: Can you identify any higher ranking positions that have been filled by people of racially diverse backgrounds?

Kyle Brink: I think if you look at the credits of our books, you'll see some lead designers there who are not cis men. You will also see a lot of primary authors on sources.

These are people who are coming up through the ranks and proving themselves and earning their respect not because of who they are but because of how they are as professionals - which is the best kind of respect. You don't want to be respected because you're the diversity hire. You want to be respected because you're awesome at your job. And that's happening more and more.

Guys like me, we're leaving the workforce, to be blunt. We're not the face of the hobby anymore. I'm not the majority of this hobby anymore.

And so it's important to me that my team of creators look like my players, and have the lived experience that my players do.

And I think there's been mistakes made in years past where people assumed that D&D players were all, y'know, white dudes in a basement. Which has been a faulty assumption for a lot of years and gets more and more false every day and so in my viewpoint, honestly, guys like me can't leave soon enough for this hobby.

And we owe you good games; we owe you good products. And so we need to make sure that everybody working on it is real good at it. And that means not just hiring but also developing. When we bring people in who are good, we need to empower them - give them more room to run. Give them guidance on what we learned when we were creating stuff so that they can create great stuff too.

I always hire people smarter than me, so that I can get out of their way. That's my approach. So as long as we stay on this trajectory, the face of D&D will literally change.

I bolded the part in question, but you can read the other context.

Mistwell is saying that "guys like me" means members of the 100% white male D&D management, which is on topic for the question. Pundit is saying that "guys like me" means all white male gamers in the hobby, i.e. Brink switched to talk about the gaming public instead of the workforce.


I think debating the exact meaning is pointless, since either way, I think he's just spouting empty corporate words that mean nothing except for spin. I don't think that the 100% white male management is actually racially discriminating against white males. I think they're untrustworthy and just stoking divisiveness.

If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 05, 2023, 10:04:06 PM
If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

I definitely agree the corporate culture is toxic. And this goes far beyond WoTC/Hasbro of course.

I also agree with JHKim that his response was essentially deflection, that WoTC have no intention of actually replacing their white leadership/executives with black leadership/executives the way Three Black Halflings want. They weren't calling for white men to leave the hobby, they want black people in positions of power in the company. So then to deflect Brink talks about how white men can't leave 'the hobby' soon enough. It's intended to imply to them that there'll be positions of power open at the top for black appointees. But in reality he's 'punching down' at regular gamers. That show of contempt then stirs up anti-Woke feeling, and Woke backlash, which is exactly what WoTC had been trying to do all along, and failing, during the OGL fiasco. It's all pretty contemptible.

Quote from: S'mon on March 06, 2023, 02:30:29 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 05, 2023, 10:04:06 PM
If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

I definitely agree the corporate culture is toxic. And this goes far beyond WoTC/Hasbro of course.

I also agree with JHKim that his response was essentially deflection, that WoTC have no intention of actually replacing their white leadership/executives with black leadership/executives the way Three Black Halflings want. They weren't calling for white men to leave the hobby, they want black people in positions of power in the company. So then to deflect Brink talks about how white men can't leave 'the hobby' soon enough. It's intended to imply to them that there'll be positions of power open at the top for black appointees. But in reality he's 'punching down' at regular gamers. That show of contempt then stirs up anti-Woke feeling, and Woke backlash, which is exactly what WoTC had been trying to do all along, and failing, during the OGL fiasco. It's all pretty contemptible.

Agreed. This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

Quote from: jhkim on March 07, 2023, 01:14:48 PM

Quote from: S'mon on March 06, 2023, 02:30:29 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 05, 2023, 10:04:06 PM
If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

I definitely agree the corporate culture is toxic. And this goes far beyond WoTC/Hasbro of course.

I also agree with JHKim that his response was essentially deflection, that WoTC have no intention of actually replacing their white leadership/executives with black leadership/executives the way Three Black Halflings want. They weren't calling for white men to leave the hobby, they want black people in positions of power in the company. So then to deflect Brink talks about how white men can't leave 'the hobby' soon enough. It's intended to imply to them that there'll be positions of power open at the top for black appointees. But in reality he's 'punching down' at regular gamers. That show of contempt then stirs up anti-Woke feeling, and Woke backlash, which is exactly what WoTC had been trying to do all along, and failing, during the OGL fiasco. It's all pretty contemptible.

Agreed. This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

White men told they need to leave, minorities most affected.

Too many white men are looking for jobs at WotC, so now they're going to have to stop hiring white men to make room for the other people that have more of a right to work for WotC than white men have now.

White women need not apply as well since white women are too white to look for jobs anywhere now that M'AMs can do anything better than you!

Simple math guys, 2 + 2 = 5 or you're doing a naughty waycizm!

Quote from: jhkim on March 07, 2023, 01:14:48 PM

Quote from: S'mon on March 06, 2023, 02:30:29 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 05, 2023, 10:04:06 PM
If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

I definitely agree the corporate culture is toxic. And this goes far beyond WoTC/Hasbro of course.

I also agree with JHKim that his response was essentially deflection, that WoTC have no intention of actually replacing their white leadership/executives with black leadership/executives the way Three Black Halflings want. They weren't calling for white men to leave the hobby, they want black people in positions of power in the company. So then to deflect Brink talks about how white men can't leave 'the hobby' soon enough. It's intended to imply to them that there'll be positions of power open at the top for black appointees. But in reality he's 'punching down' at regular gamers. That show of contempt then stirs up anti-Woke feeling, and Woke backlash, which is exactly what WoTC had been trying to do all along, and failing, during the OGL fiasco. It's all pretty contemptible.

Agreed. This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

Or in other words we all hear an anti white statement and woke folk think it is not anti white enough nor the actions with it.  Got it.

I think this is on-topic enough - re the origin of the toxic corporate culture, I found this UnHerd article on Blackrock & ESG very enlightening - https://unherd.com/2023/03/blackrocks-tyrannical-esg-agenda/

Basically, it is a way to put the corporations & the investment firms 'above criticism'. This is what WoTC was trying to do with the OGL - "We have to be evil to Fight Hate!"

In old Prussia they said there was a "Marriage of Iron & Rye" - an alliance between the farming interests (the Junkers) and the industrialist businessmen, to control State & Society in their interests. We have a similar "Marriage of Marx & Capital" now, I think. Neo-Marxism is ever more closely aligned with the Corporate* interest, to the extent that they are becoming indistinguishable, like Man & Pig at the end of Animal Farm.

*Not the interests of the shareholders, BTW! So maybe 'Capital' isn't the right word. It's definitely a form of 'Corporate State' system, though.

Quote from: S'mon on March 08, 2023, 05:37:14 AM
I think this is on-topic enough - re the origin of the toxic corporate culture, I found this UnHerd article on Blackrock & ESG very enlightening - https://unherd.com/2023/03/blackrocks-tyrannical-esg-agenda/

Basically, it is a way to put the corporations & the investment firms 'above criticism'. This is what WoTC was trying to do with the OGL - "We have to be evil to Fight Hate!"

In old Prussia they said there was a "Marriage of Iron & Rye" - an alliance between the farming interests (the Junkers) and the industrialist businessmen, to control State & Society in their interests. We have a similar "Marriage of Marx & Capital" now, I think. Neo-Marxism is ever more closely aligned with the Corporate* interest, to the extent that they are becoming indistinguishable, like Man & Pig at the end of Animal Farm.

*Not the interests of the shareholders, BTW! So maybe 'Capital' isn't the right word. It's definitely a form of 'Corporate State' system, though.

  Corporations and government offices are not randomly and accidentally adopting DEI standards out of thin air.   No doubt BR owns a sizeable chunk of Hasboro if anyone cares to look.  Social engineering from a central source top down....Marx would literally cream his shorts.   This is also the part of that whole ideology that everyone always misses....equity for all always needs overlords and learned masters to ensure "everyone else" has full equity with closely guarded keys to the upper floors of life.

Quote from: oggsmash on March 08, 2023, 05:28:15 AM

Quote from: jhkim on March 07, 2023, 01:14:48 PM
This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

Or in other words we all hear an anti white statement and woke folk think it is not anti white enough nor the actions with it.  Got it.

That partly matches what I was trying to say, except for the part I bolded with strikethrough - which is the opposite. The statement is more anti-white than most progressives would say.

It's following the same pattern as in previous, like stoking the supposed controversy over Candlekeep Mysteries and wheelchairs -- where an interview with one designer implied a position far more extreme than what most progressives would want... And nothing in the book had anything like the hype.

They're extreme in talk (to benefit from controversy) while at most centrist in action.

---

As another example, take alignment. For decades, there have been dozens of fantasy RPGs without alignment mechanics. They were always a D&D mechanic that was rarely imitated in other RPGs, even in the same genre. But by having some liberal hype, suddenly it becomes the height of wokeness to not have alignment.

Quote from: jhkim on March 08, 2023, 01:12:12 PM
As another example, take alignment. For decades, there have been dozens of fantasy RPGs without alignment mechanics. They were always a D&D mechanic that was rarely imitated in other RPGs, even in the same genre. But by having some liberal hype, suddenly it becomes the height of wokeness to not have alignment.

Totally. I don't understand why anyone would think the mechanic itself is somehow immortal. I think it's an overly simplistic and somewhat nonsensical OCD sacred cow that gets taken way more seriously than it has any right to be, but not immoral. But I digress.

Quote from: jhkim on March 08, 2023, 01:12:12 PM

Quote from: oggsmash on March 08, 2023, 05:28:15 AM

Quote from: jhkim on March 07, 2023, 01:14:48 PM
This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

Or in other words we all hear an anti white statement and woke folk think it is not anti white enough nor the actions with it.  Got it.

That partly matches what I was trying to say, except for the part I bolded with strikethrough - which is the opposite. The statement is more anti-white than most progressives would say.

It's following the same pattern as in previous, like stoking the supposed controversy over Candlekeep Mysteries and wheelchairs -- where an interview with one designer implied a position far more extreme than what most progressives would want... And nothing in the book had anything like the hype.

They're extreme in talk (to benefit from controversy) while at most centrist in action.

---

As another example, take alignment. For decades, there have been dozens of fantasy RPGs without alignment mechanics. They were always a D&D mechanic that was rarely imitated in other RPGs, even in the same genre. But by having some liberal hype, suddenly it becomes the height of wokeness to not have alignment.

Not having the mechanic in a game that never had it? No problemo, On a new game? No problemo

Removing it from D&D? There might be a problem, especially if they have been saying it's evil to have always evil races for wordsalad, buzzword, buzzword.

But I haven't seen D&D removing the mechanic wholecloth, just making it meaningless by not having always evil/good/neutral races. They HAVE stated the reasons behind that move, to do as the woketards demand because evil orcs are (for the progressive anti-racist) a stand in for black people.

So you'll see people calling the move woke, BECAUSE it is.

But you're being your usual disingenuous self.

Evil races in my fantasy game == Problematic

Normie whites looking for day jobs == REEEEEEEEEE

Quote from: jhkim on March 07, 2023, 01:14:48 PM

Quote from: S'mon on March 06, 2023, 02:30:29 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 05, 2023, 10:04:06 PM
If they are Corporate Words, ie indicative of the corporate culture at WotC, and it's being used as 'spin', in other words telling the audience he actually values what he thinks they want to hear, then that doesn't make any of what he said better, it makes it worse, because it says that this is a fundamental issue with the company. The fact that the company has chosen to start blocking people from social media who ask/challenge about this question, rather than in some way distancing themselves from Brink's declaration about white people, seems to be proof that you're right about this, that it is a part of the corporate culture to call for racial discrimination, and the entire institution is toxic.

I definitely agree the corporate culture is toxic. And this goes far beyond WoTC/Hasbro of course.

I also agree with JHKim that his response was essentially deflection, that WoTC have no intention of actually replacing their white leadership/executives with black leadership/executives the way Three Black Halflings want. They weren't calling for white men to leave the hobby, they want black people in positions of power in the company. So then to deflect Brink talks about how white men can't leave 'the hobby' soon enough. It's intended to imply to them that there'll be positions of power open at the top for black appointees. But in reality he's 'punching down' at regular gamers. That show of contempt then stirs up anti-Woke feeling, and Woke backlash, which is exactly what WoTC had been trying to do all along, and failing, during the OGL fiasco. It's all pretty contemptible.

Agreed. This also seems annoyingly strategic in how he drew the line. Because of Brink's spin, if in the future anyone who *isn't* white male gets hired at WotC, it'll be portrayed as a token diversity hire rather than hiring purely based on qualifications. Brink's spin is that the non-discriminatory norm is 100% white male, and that hiring anyone else takes special attention by white men to raise them up.

Anti-woke people focus on his anti-white-male language and declare it the height of woke discrimination -- while woke people will focus on the 100% white male management, and see the exact opposite.

I've pointed out both, though I'll note that the executive at WotC isn't 100% white male. It's 100% white left coast champagne-progressive, but there's also white women in those positions.