quote:

---

Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

WotC just continues to sh*t on D&D. I had a brief moment of hope when 5e first came out, but that quickly dissipated. They don't care about the authenticity of any setting, and now they have made it clear they don't care about creators or players, either. Capitalism at its finest.

I have been a fan of Critical Role for the past couple of years, but with the OGL debacle, and a bunch of theories about what the cast is going to do, even that has become more stress than fun. I think it's time I said goodbye to anything D&D for a while, and check in at a later date.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Who is this guy, and where are these reports?

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4kGMsZSdbY

The report is at 12:20

---

Finally sat down to watch this video... And gave up a few minutes into it. I am highly skeptical that the VP of Digital would be surprised by the acquisition of DNDBeyond, and even more skeptical that he'd say "Hey, we just spent a hell of a lot of money to get this thing that does exactly what I want... Let's destroy it so we can build a new one that does the same thing."

I know this D&D Shorts guy also said that no one reads the surveys, but there's been a hell of a lot of WotC people coming forward to say that's not true.

I'm not going to take everything WotC says on faith, of course, especially given their lies about 4E. But I also need more than someone saying "trust me, I've verified this" before I believe them.

I realize it may seem like I'm being difficult and nitpicky, but I'm disinclined to take anyone's statement as truth without some verification, especially when it deals with "insider" information that no one else is getting and that contains real headscratchers like the one above.

I'm not saying the guy is lying, I'm just saying I need more than just one person giving me this info.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

WotC just continues to sh*t on D&D. I had a brief moment of hope when 5e first came out, but that quickly dissipated. They don't care about the authenticity of any setting, and now they have made it clear they don't care about creators or players, either. Capitalism at its finest.

I have been a fan of Critical Role for the past couple of years, but with the OGL debacle, and a bunch of theories about what the cast is going to do, even that has become more stress than fun. I think it's time I said goodbye to anything D&D for a while, and check in at a later date.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan



I understand being skeptical, but immediately dropping what the people who have spearheaded the exposure of 1.1 (while being accurate about WotC's intentions and various details) have to say, is indeed extreme and a bit uncritical. I'd say: listen to the whole 15 mins or so, then decide what you think is believable, and what isn't.

DnDshorts isn't the only one reporting on this. Roll for Combat even had the leaked terms of the "sweetened" contracts WotC was offering to the creators willing to sign 1.1 before Jan 13th.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

How many people are reporting that the VP of Digital didn't know that his company was buying a digital platform and that he wants to piss all that money away by destroying it?

---

quote:

---

How can we trust you?

Multiple people have had contact with these sources and can confirm I'm honestly and accurately relating information. Ginny Di, Ted from Nerd Immersion, Treantmonk, and the lawyer Noah Downs have all had access to verify that this material is real. This is a direct recounting of all that I have been sent.


How can we trust these "employees" are who they say they are?

All these employees reached out to me initially over email. Immediately, I ignored those emails, and messaged the person they were claiming to be directly on Linkedin via a burner account I created for this purpose. This was always the first step of verification. Once the person had respoded via Linkedin, I had confirmation that, at the very least, someone with both this person's email address and linkedin profile was getting in touch.

From here I opened communications, and requested additional proof. This involved a direct, face-to-face call, and usually additional contact via the person's social media. When dealing with senior employees, I was also provided internal WotC documentation that verified their position.


How was this information gathered?

I stayed on face-to-face calls with employees usually only for a few minutes to verify their identity. In some cases, we spoke further, but the calls were not recorded.

All the quotes that appear in this video were sent to me via email, whatsapp, or similar IM services. In the interest of protecting the sources, all quotes (with the exception of the quotes on personal experience of the company at the end) have been fed through a syntax paraphraser bot. The employees then checked over these rephrasings to ensure the message they were communicating was still accurate.


Can we trust this information?

It is essential to recognise that all personal accounts come with a human bias. Everything in this video has been checked a verified by multiple employees (unbenknownst to each other). There is no material in this video that comes from only a single source that could not be verified.

Although bias is inevitable in any account from a human, I believe that when multiple people (across multiple departments) are saying the same things, we can put a lot more trust in that information.

However, I'd ask that your remember two things:

1) These employees felt the need to risk their livelihoods to come forward. It is unlikely they would have done so had they not had extremely serious concerns regarding Wizards of the Coast and the OGL. Please bear this in mind when evalutating their comments. Content employees usually don't risk everything to break silence.

2) I am merely representing to the best of my ability what these people have told me. I do not work at Wizards. However, I believe all the information I present in this video to be true. Not only was it verified by multiple people, but it tracks with leaks others have exposed (from insiders I am not in contact with), and explains a great deal of WotC's actions over the last year in a way that WotC's own accounts of their behaviour do not.


What about the source who told you the survey's weren't read?

I failed to accurately represent the information I was given by one source regarding surveys in D&D. I was openly rebbuted by members of the design team on this point. They have said they did, and do, take written survey material into account. I believe them.

I've posted the full thread where I contact the employee who gave me that information to understand where I failed. You can find it on my twitter, and also in the previous video on the channel.

I beleive that person to be honest but I feel I can no longer ask that you trust them. They are not present in this review.


Why are you doing this?

I made a promise to the community and these employees that I would share everything they told me. This video is me completing on that promise. I will not be sharing any leaks anymore. All information will be passed directly to Linda Codega, a real reporter, at Gizmodo.


Will you still cover the OGL?

Yes, I will cover news as it drops from journalists and Wizards of the Coast directly.


What if I don't believe a word you say?

Skepticism is healthy online. You should view all leaks with a healthy level of doubt. I believe I have provided all the evidence I can short of risking compromising the identity of these employees that I am sharing information honestly.

All I ask is, whatever your feelings toward me or this channel, you set them aside to review this information honestly and critically.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ayrik

There comes a point where all the known information has been exposed and explained, where anything else is just speculations or re-runs.

We're still stuck at that point. Until more information becomes available - when Wizbro releases their new license, when somebody else releases their new license, when the old or new licenses get dragged through court, whatever.

I doubt there's much to learn from videos which are re-reporting and re-speculating what's been revealed before. There's just nothing more to say until there's something more to talk about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ayrik

There comes a point where all the known information has been exposed and explained, where anything else is just speculations or re-runs.

We're still stuck at that point. Until more information becomes available - when Wizbro releases their new license, when somebody else releases their new license, when the old or new licenses get dragged through court, whatever.

I doubt there's much to learn from videos which are re-reporting and re-speculating what's been revealed before. There's just nothing more to say until there's something more to talk about.

---

We were discussing a specific video that revealed the leaks about Chris Cao and his plans. The matter is about whether to believe the leakers or not, but given that the leakers have been spot on on almost everything, I'd say their stuff is worth a listen (if you're interested in the tpoic, that is).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

Also, if you just can't believe that Cao was surprised by the acquisition of Beyond, consider that a digital VP wouldn't necessarily be the one handling buying other companies. A quick search on what that role does, returns that it usually plans roadmaps and direction for product development, as well as delivering analysis and reports to the leadership.

It's very easy to imagine a leadership not bothering to tell those "below" them that they decided that the data at hand warranted buying another company, until the deed is done. Cao's original intent might have been to destroy Beyond, but the leadership might have easily considered acquiring it and then phasing it out to be the more advantageous choice. After all, lack of communication (and actively prohibiting communication between certain teams) is another reported problem at WotC.

IMO, you've been too quick to label this as unbelievable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheIriaeban

Not all companies are so open about their acquisitions. My company only lets the employees know about it on the day that the public announcement is made. All the people involved in the due diligence process are expected to keep it a secret until then. And that is with snapping up 1 to 3 companies a year. I am not sure how we rate in size. We are closing in on 10k employees and revenues are over 1 billion a year.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

Also, if you just can't believe that Cao was surprised by the acquisition of Beyond, consider that a digital VP wouldn't necessarily be the one handling buying other companies. A quick search on what that role does, returns that it usually plans roadmaps and direction for product development, as well as delivering analysis and reports to the leadership.

It's very easy to imagine a leadership not bothering to tell those "below" them that they decided that the data at hand warranted buying another company, until the deed is done. Cao's original intent might have been to destroy Beyond, but the leadership might have easily considered acquiring it and then phasing it out to be the more advantageous choice. After all, lack of communication (and actively prohibiting communication between certain teams) is another reported problem at WotC.

IMO, you've been too quick to label this as unbelievable.

---

He wouldn't have been the one planning the acquisition, but it's simply not believable that a major acquisition of something that would fall under his leadership was planned with him being entirely kept in the dark about it.

I've worked for small companies, and I've worked for large companies. Right now I work for one that is many times the size of WotC. Even small acquisitions, word gets around pretty quick, and long before any official announcement.

Acquisitions are not something that can be kept secret -- there's too many moving parts. Leadership may be the decision makers driving it, but there are teams of lawyers involved, and the finance people will be involved, and HR is going to be involved, and IT will be involved... And VPs are not left out of this. They may not be part of the driving force behind the acquisition, but they're going to be looped in on it, at the very least. They're going to know that it's happening before the offer is even made.

And that especially applies to a VP whose job is going to be affected by the acquisition -- as Chris Cao certainly would have been, in this case. It's exceedingly unlikely that someone in his position wouldn't be consulted, beforehand, even if it was a pro forma consultation after the higher-ups had already decided it was happening.

As I said, I've seen acquisitions while working for companies much smaller than WotC, and I've seen them while working for companies much bigger than WotC. The odds of him not knowing about the DNDBeyond acquisition are somewhere south of my odds of winning the Miss America pageant. And I'm a dude that you most definitely do not want to see in a bikini.

So, as someone who has been involved in acquisitions large and small, and who has read about many others, I am most certainly labeling that claim as unbelievable, and I've got very good reason for doing so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheIriaeban

Not all companies are so open about their acquisitions. My company only lets the employees know about it on the day that the public announcement is made. All the people involved in the due diligence process are expected to keep it a secret until then. And that is with snapping up 1 to 3 companies a year. I am not sure how we rate in size. We are closing in on 10k employees and revenues are over 1 billion a year.

---

From what I read online, WotC's revenues are higher than that, and they've got about 1500 employees.

My current job generally doesn't tell the employees about it until it's announced in public -- but the people that are supposed to keep things secret still talk, even if only obliquely. I recall one acquisition, I found out about it months before it was public, because one of the accounting people needed help and said "I've got to get this working as soon as possible because of the acquisition." The person gave no further details, but by asking around, it only took a few days to get the basic info.

But either way, there's simply no way that a VP of a relevant division is going to be excluded. Either they're directly involved or they're kept in the loop because of their position.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart

Not that I'm entirely agreeing with TheIriaeban, but given the fact that I'm working for a company that has been acquired (twice, now) and is acquiring others, I can say that it is VERY possible Cao had no idea they were purchasing D&D Beyond.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart

Not that I'm entirely agreeing with TheIriaeban, but given the fact that I'm working for a company that has been acquired (twice, now) and is acquiring others, I can say that it is VERY possible Cao had no idea they were purchasing D&D Beyond.

---

Again, there's simply no way that a VP of a division is going to be excluded from knowing about an acquisition directly affecting that division. Either they're directly involved or they're kept in the loop because of their VP status, along with all the other VPs and divisional presidents.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
snip

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart

Not that I'm entirely agreeing with TheIriaeban, but given the fact that I'm working for a company that has been acquired (twice, now) and is acquiring others, I can say that it is VERY possible Cao had no idea they were purchasing D&D Beyond.

---

Again, there's simply no way that a VP of a division is going to be excluded from knowing about an acquisition directly affecting that division. Either they're directly involved or they're kept in the loop because of their VP status, along with all the other VPs and divisional presidents.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
if that VP isn't well-liked or respected by other VPs or people higher-up the food chain.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Another sign of how pissed D&D fans are: Pathfinder sales are surging.

The Tweet linked in the article says "Additionally, we have run through what was an 8-month supply of our Pathfinder Core Rulebook in the last 2 weeks, and demand on our Beginner Boxes is surging too. We have already ordered another print run of the hardcover Core Rulebook, which will arrive in mid-April. "

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Another sign of how pissed D&D fans are: Pathfinder sales are surging.

The Tweet linked in the article says "Additionally, we have run through what was an 8-month supply of our Pathfinder Core Rulebook in the last 2 weeks, and demand on our Beginner Boxes is surging too. We have already ordered another print run of the hardcover Core Rulebook, which will arrive in mid-April. "

---

I can personally attest to this. When they announced the sale for OGL support, I ordered two Beginner Boxes (one for me, one for my library) and they haven't processed to shipping yet.

---