WoTC Trying Hard to Ruin Dragonlance, Spelljammer

migo · April 28, 2022, 05:49:00 AM

One thing is woke marketing could be signalling to investors that the company is healthy, because they can waste money on frivolous pursuits. If it's a division like RPGs that really doesn't bring in any money for a company like Hasbro, they're not really losing anything and may profit by way of investment.

The other thing is if a company is going broke, they may go woke as a last ditch effort. Their core customer base has already largely abandoned them (or they made some terrible financial decisions), so they do woke marketing to try to get a new customer base.

RPGPundit · April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM

Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

RPGPundit · April 28, 2022, 07:55:22 AM

Quote from: Omega on April 27, 2022, 10:44:14 PM
Quote from: SHARK on April 27, 2022, 06:22:54 PM
Omega, saying that Pundit is a Pavlovian dog is not only harsh, but unfair. I think your critique is entirely misplaced and wrong, as well. Pundit has taken on the task not only here, but also more specifically at Inappropriate Characters, as well as his own videos, to focus on discussion of concepts, trends, and news going on in the hobby.

I don't know why you so often snidely critique Pundit's programming, man. His program is about gaming, the gaming hobby, news, and politics.

It is neither harsh nor unfair. And we all fall for it all too often. Even me and I am on to their little game and still fell for it. Every post and vid we make in opposition of whatever concocted wrong WOTC in particular is smokescreening today is just more free advertising for them.

I do not snidely critique Pundit. I point out a very real problem that we are being played and Pundit really should pay attention more. We have seen time and again now where WOTC makes some announcement that reads WOKE AGENDA!!!, but the actual product has had a marked tendency to not have these proclaimed things. Either so small an instance as to be just short of non-existent. Or like Candlekeep... really is non-existent.

You're not entirely wrong. WoTC knows that most regular D&D gamers will never see the Dragonlance Trailer, and most SJWs from Tumblr and Twitter will.
On the other hand, they know that most of the SJWs will never buy Dragonlance, while regular gamers will.

But to suggest that there's not any wokeness in the recent D&D products, or that they do not intentionally disfigure the tropes and values of D&D gaming, is wrong.

Also, the problem of wokists in the hobby, which disproportionately affects content creators who aren't woke (because the wokists want to destroy those people), is still very much something that is in my personal interest to point out.

Ghostmaker · April 28, 2022, 08:01:19 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

Sir, the 13th Amendment forbids owning someone like that.

Armchair Gamer · April 28, 2022, 08:46:59 AM

Quote from: Valatar on April 27, 2022, 11:34:01 PM
Jeff Grubb did not sell Spelljammer. He was working for TSR at the time, the company owned it from day one. As for Weis and Hickman, they did some legal arrangement with TSR, so sockpuppet is correct, they sold the IP fair and square. Of course, back when they sold it they probably sold it to people with whom they had some kind of basic respect and the expectation that they wouldn't be treated like shit, but that's the way the cookie crumbles when a company gets sold and decades go by. Just ask the Tolkiens how they feel about the big fat nothing they got for the recent movies.

Hickman came up with the concept for Dragonlance when driving from Utah to Wisconsin to start his job at TSR, then pitched it to them and they bought it; everything since was done as 'work for hire.' And Weis & Hickman's relationship with the ownership has been testy and tumultuous for the past thirty-five years.

Tubesock Army · April 28, 2022, 08:59:18 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

Yep. If he ends up buying Twitter, he can do as he damn well pleases with it. Whether you, I, or anyone else likes or dislikes it is beside the point. That's how this shit works.

Abraxus · April 28, 2022, 09:05:31 AM

Thank you captain very Obvious for telling us something we already knew.

It's how Capitalism works 😂

How about coming up with some new material or just something new that no one knows about.

BoxCrayonTales · April 28, 2022, 10:28:35 AM

This is why we need more competition in the tabletop space. If companies are ruining old IPs or just preventing the flourishing of alternatives in general, then we should be funding the creation of replacements that scratch that itch. Much like how OnePageRules created alternatives to Games Workshop games.

VisionStorm · April 28, 2022, 10:45:44 AM

Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 28, 2022, 08:59:18 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit on April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

Yep. If he ends up buying Twitter, he can do as he damn well pleases with it. Whether you, I, or anyone else likes or dislikes it is beside the point. That's how this shit works.

And if people don't like it, find it unfair or see some sort of flaw in a product they will complain about it as they damn well please. Whether that's how capitalism works or not is beside the point. That's how free speech works.

And crying about "Buy what about the production system and the sacred rights of wealthy individuals and soulless corporations to own shit?" isn't a counter argument.

oggsmash · April 28, 2022, 10:52:03 AM

Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 28, 2022, 08:59:18 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit on April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

Yep. If he ends up buying Twitter, he can do as he damn well pleases with it. Whether you, I, or anyone else likes or dislikes it is beside the point. That's how this shit works.

Bullshit. The federal government will come down on him like a hammer to "create a safe online environment" and be cheered by half the population to do so. Not to mention the lawfare incoming from all sorts of NGO operations with agendas.

VisionStorm · April 28, 2022, 11:01:02 AM

Quote from: Jaeger on April 27, 2022, 08:17:17 PMAnd SpellJammer always Fucking sucked. Making it suck even harder, and finally putting the poor thing down is actually a service to the D&D community. As unintentional as it is on WotC's part.

Wrong. Spelljammer is one of the three greatest D&D settings ever created (the other two being Dark Sun and Planescape). And as lame as I'm sure that WotC's changes to it will turn out to be, I doubt that they'll end up killing it. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be one of the most popular settings for D&D's current audience (grognards who already don't give their money to WotC will probably reject it, though, but WotC has consistently shown they don't care about us).

oggsmash · April 28, 2022, 11:08:48 AM

Never was a fan of Dragon Lance or spelljammer. Barely paged through spelljammer years ago, and DL, though I had the book (1st ed) never caught on for me. I preferred the more Sandbox setting of Greyhawk, and still do. I regret they may be pooping on a property some love, but for me it is no loss.

HappyDaze · April 28, 2022, 11:10:31 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on April 28, 2022, 11:01:02 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on April 27, 2022, 08:17:17 PMAnd SpellJammer always Fucking sucked. Making it suck even harder, and finally putting the poor thing down is actually a service to the D&D community. As unintentional as it is on WotC's part.

Wrong. Spelljammer is one of the three greatest D&D settings ever created (the other two being Dark Sun and Planescape). And as lame as I'm sure that WotC's changes to it will turn out to be, I doubt that they'll end up killing it. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be one of the most popular settings for D&D's current audience (grognards who already don't give their money to WotC will probably reject it, though, but WotC has consistently shown they don't care about us).

It was certainly among the most non-traditional, and your other two settings are also contenders for that. The rest of your post is pretty much exactly my feelings on why this might just be perfect for WotC's intended customers.

Ghostmaker · April 28, 2022, 11:12:09 AM

Quote from: oggsmash on April 28, 2022, 10:52:03 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 28, 2022, 08:59:18 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit on April 28, 2022, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 01:55:34 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm on April 27, 2022, 01:11:30 PM
Quote from: Tubesock Army on April 27, 2022, 09:52:22 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on April 27, 2022, 07:39:44 AM
Ignore Cucksuck Soyarmy he is not here to discuss to Troll us on general principles.

Uh-huh. Ignore the guy who brought up the valid point that after selling your IP, you have no reasonable expectation of future involvement with said IP. It's the ones autistically flapping their hands while reflexively screeching, "groomercommiesoyboycuck", apropos of nothing, that are arguing in good faith.

Also, why not Tubesuck? Tubecuck? Jesus, you guys even suck at insults. Then again, I've seen what passes for gaming discourse here, so I'm not surprised.

No defense of the sacred right of corporations or copyright holders of IPs they didn't even create is ever valid. Specially when they haven't even used them in decades, but have simply lorded them over them as "owners".

Um they're selling those products right now and have been for years you utter doorknob.

And I'm not defending corporations, I'm defending the right to own something once someone has willingly and legally sold it to you. It's called capitalism, you might wanna look into it sometime.

You mean like Elon Musk?

Yep. If he ends up buying Twitter, he can do as he damn well pleases with it. Whether you, I, or anyone else likes or dislikes it is beside the point. That's how this shit works.

Bullshit. The federal government will come down on him like a hammer to "create a safe online environment" and be cheered by half the population to do so. Not to mention the lawfare incoming from all sorts of NGO operations with agendas.

They can try, but the moment they do it opens the doors to ask exactly why Jeff Bezos owns the WaPo.

Armchair Gamer · April 28, 2022, 11:30:24 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on April 28, 2022, 11:01:02 AM
Wrong. Spelljammer is one of the three greatest D&D settings ever created (the other two being Dark Sun and Planescape). And as lame as I'm sure that WotC's changes to it will turn out to be, I doubt that they'll end up killing it. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be one of the most popular settings for D&D's current audience (grognards who already don't give their money to WotC will probably reject it, though, but WotC has consistently shown they don't care about us).

Meanwhile, as I've noted repeatedly, Dragonlance has a strain in it--anti-establishment, sympathetic to the outcast and 'special snowflakes' as well as intellectuals who are 'beyond good and evil', and religiously relativist and enshrining tolerance and diversity as Supreme Goods--that would be perfect for WotC's approach to the game if they leaned into it.