Would it be good or bad if future of 5e and DnD in general was via Tencent/China?

[animewatcha]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3kLTJ7x4rw

Topic says it all. Could DnD improve or should we look more into alternatives (more than we are now)?

[Psyren]

I can't imagine they would do a substantially worse job than Hasbro has. But it's important to note there hasn't been any kind of confirmation or corroboration from Hasbro or WotC themselves, it's all rumors and speculation.

[Mastikator]

IF D&D was sold to Tencent then I can forsee a couple of possible futures

D&D only exists as a VTT/Video game, paizo or black flag or something else will take over the tabletop market
D&D is changed to conform to tencent ideology (a censorious corporation marked as "non-compliant" by UN global compact), D&D tabletop becomes less popular in the west
Things proceed as normal, but with a bigger budget for projects, tencent reaps the profits without interfering with the business (LOL)
Massive expansion of D&D related products in china, D&D becomes less homogenus than it already is (I don't know if that's a good or bad thing, probably good)


This seems kinda dumb though, D&D is one of Hasbro's most profitable items, selling their biggest cash cow will lead to their own death. OTOH Chris Cooks could liquidate the company after selling D&D, leaving everyone out to dry while he sips martinis on his yacht.

Yeah personally I view this as a "D&D tabletop is facing down the barrel" kind of scenario, if they sell.

[TrueAlphaGamer]

Ignoring the "content farm slop" style of the video with an initial source of dubious veracity, and the fact that this is likely not happening anytime soon . . .

This sort of acquisition would likely have little impact on the game. If anything, it would likely skew towards the release of more content, as well as content that is generally more focused on mass appeal. Perhaps there would be a greater focus on the international (Chinese) market, but that's up in the air.

There are many gaming companies which are owned by Tencent that operate in the west, and I believe that most of them conduct their business more or less unchanged from whenever they weren't owned by them (speaking purely from an aesthetic and design standpoint, obviously it affects monetization and developer focus). I doubt there would be much in the way of censorship of content, outside of maybe a few regional differences.

Regardless, if any changes do occur, there's nothing stopping people from just using an older version of the game. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

WotC has officially denied the rumors, per this tweet from Christian Hoffer from The Character Sheet: https://twitter.com/CHofferCBus/status/1753058841191674359

Move along folks, nothing to see here.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

WotC has officially denied the rumors, per this tweet from Christian Hoffer from The Character Sheet: https://twitter.com/CHofferCBus/status/1753058841191674359

Move along folks, nothing to see here.

I've helped with M&As and denying rumors is "M&A basics 101", so them denying it doesn't really mean anything. You don't want your employees jumping ship, you don't want anything to negatively impact any deals that are going on, and you don't want to give the buyer any sort of leverage.

I don't think Hasbro would want to sell D&D itself, though the videogame rights can be another thing, but putting out a statement like that just doesn't mean anything.

[Psyren]

I've helped with M&As and denying rumors is "M&A basics 101", so them denying it doesn't really mean anything.

Right, I forgot the community they're dealing with. Spiral away.

[KorvinStarmast]

IF D&D was sold to Tencent then I can forsee a couple of possible futures
OTOH Chris Cooks could liquidate the company after selling D&D, leaving everyone out to dry while he sips martinis on his yacht. I can see that as a possible future.

WotC has officially denied the rumors, per this tweet from Christian Hoffer from The Character Sheet: https://twitter.com/CHofferCBus/status/1753058841191674359 Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? (Mandy Rice-Davies riff...)
While being cross-examined ... Rice-Davies made a riposte which has since become famous. When James Burge, the defence counsel, pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or even having met her, she dispatched this swiftly with pert humour, "Well he would, wouldn't he?" (often misquoted "Well he would say that, wouldn't he?"). [11]

I've helped with M&As and denying rumors is "M&A basics 101", so them denying it doesn't really mean anything. You don't want your employees jumping ship, you don't want anything to negatively impact any deals that are going on, and you don't want to give the buyer any sort of leverage. Yes. PR speech - take at face value at your own risk.

[Anymage]

Right, I forgot the community they're dealing with. Spiral away.

It's possible to simultaneously say that there'd be denials if the deal were going through, and that selling off D&D as a TTRPG is very unlikely.

Following up on the hypothetical, I'd be worried that it would be very bad for the hobby but not due to anything specific to Tencent. Just that anybody willing to lay out that much cash for the entirety of D&D will want to recoup that money and will likely be looking at predatory monetization tactics to do so. I don't think the hobby would do that well with another such attempt so soon on the heels of the OGL fiasco.

[Psyren]

Stephen Glicker from Roll For Combat now believes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSMThxKiQUk) he was inadvertently the source of the rumor.

Theoretical Timeline:

1) Two weeks ago, Stephen Glicker makes a short speculative video (this one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZrNJeAepxc)) along the lines of "Hasbro isn't doing so well, what if they had to sell D&D and who would buy it? I think Larian would be a good candidate since they clearly love D&D, but their pockets aren't deep enough for Hasbro, so they might need to convince their stakeholder Tencent since they own 30% of Larian, and their pockets are definitely deep enough for such a valuable IP."

2) A Chinese language news aggregator called Snow Leopard, which appears to be AI-driven (yay, what a world we live in!) is scraping the western web for content. Something about RFC's video gets it on their radar - perhaps the speculative mention of Tencent - in combination with the language/keywords he uses throughout the video which makes him appear as a legitimate news source to their scraper.

3) Snow Leopard's AI publishes the article, and then it gets picked up by another Chinese language aggregator called Panda Daily. (https://pandaily.com/hasbro-seeks-to-sell-ip-dnd-and-has-had-preliminary-contact-with-tencent/) From there it quickly goes viral because slow news cycle.

4) As mentioned - slow news cycle, so the discussion around this continues to swirl until WotC feels the need to issue an official statement today. And here we are.

(Of course, it's also possible that either Stephen is uncommonly prophetic, or that someone at Hasbro saw his initial video and in less than a week opened talks with TenCent which then leaked. And of course, this whole kerfuffle might convince some suit to explore this as an option apropos of nothing. Stranger things have happened. But my money is on the timeline above.)

[KorvinStarmast]

It's possible to simultaneously say that there'd be denials if the deal were going through, and that selling off D&D as a TTRPG is very unlikely.

Following up on the hypothetical, I'd be worried that it would be very bad for the hobby but not due to anything specific to Tencent. Just that anybody willing to lay out that much cash for the entirety of D&D will want to recoup that money and will likely be looking at predatory monetization tactics to do so. I don't think the hobby would do that well with another such attempt so soon on the heels of the OGL fiasco. I'd go back to how I behaved during most of 3.x and all of 4 e.
Not buy anything.

Stephen Glicker from Roll For Combat now believes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSMThxKiQUk) he was inadvertently the source of the rumor.

Theoretical Timeline:

1) Two weeks ago, Stephen Glicker makes a short speculative video (this one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZrNJeAepxc)) along the lines of "Hasbro isn't doing so well, what if they had to sell D&D and who would buy it? I think Larian would be a good candidate since they clearly love D&D, but their pockets aren't deep enough for Hasbro, so they might need to convince their stakeholder Tencent since they own 30% of Larian, and their pockets are definitely deep enough for such a valuable IP."

2) A Chinese language news aggregator called Snow Leopard, which appears to be AI-driven (yay, what a world we live in!) is scraping the western web for content. Something about RFC's video gets it on their radar - perhaps the speculative mention of Tencent - in combination with the language/keywords he uses throughout the video which makes him appear as a legitimate news source to their scraper.

3) Snow Leopard's AI publishes the article, and then it gets picked up by another Chinese language aggregator called Panda Daily. (https://pandaily.com/hasbro-seeks-to-sell-ip-dnd-and-has-had-preliminary-contact-with-tencent/) From there it quickly goes viral because slow news cycle.

4) As mentioned - slow news cycle, so the discussion around this continues to swirl until WotC feels the need to issue an official statement today. And here we are.

(Of course, it's also possible that either Stephen is uncommonly prophetic, or that someone at Hasbro saw his initial video and in less than a week opened talks with TenCent which then leaked. And of course, this whole kerfuffle might convince some suit to explore this as an option apropos of nothing. Stranger things have happened. But my money is on the timeline above.) It's time for a revolt of the Luddites.

[Psyren]

It's time for a revolt of the Luddites.

Well I mean... if nothing else, this whole mess proves two things conclusively - whether or not we're successful at curtailing AI here in the US, other countries don't seem to have any qualms about using it, and its use in those places are going to impact us whether we want it to or not.

[KorvinStarmast]

Nuke them from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.

[RogueJK]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b6/8e/5c/b68e5c98767652f1771e06995f657761.gif

[Mindflayer_Inc]

Right, I forgot the community they're dealing with. Spiral away.

Did you not read my comment or are you just always rude when someone post something that contradicts you?

If you don't understand public relations, then that's on you.

[DammitVictor]

I don't think it's very likely, but I agree the firm denial means absolutely nothing. Tencent owning WotC probably wouldn't mean much for us, but the few changes I imagine would be fairly positive: an aggressive promotion of the D&D scene in Chinese-language markets and Larian Studios having effective carte blanc to make whatever, and as many, D&D games as they want, alongside Tencent's other properties.

Whether or not they'd prioritize tabletop and print products is... basically unknowable at this point.

Hasbro selling WotC to practically anybody else is a win for the D&D community, and Tencent is probably in the top half of the candidates because of Larian. It's not the best case scenario I've drawn out before... but it's likelier than that best case scenario and most of the worst case scenarios.

[Mastikator]

I don't think it's very likely, but I agree the firm denial means absolutely nothing. Tencent owning WotC probably wouldn't mean much for us, but the few changes I imagine would be fairly positive: an aggressive promotion of the D&D scene in Chinese-language markets and Larian Studios having effective carte blanc to make whatever, and as many, D&D games as they want, alongside Tencent's other properties.

Whether or not they'd prioritize tabletop and print products is... basically unknowable at this point.

Hasbro selling WotC to practically anybody else is a win for the D&D community, and Tencent is probably in the top half of the candidates because of Larian. It's not the best case scenario I've drawn out before... but it's likelier than that best case scenario and most of the worst case scenarios.

It's fake news created by AI.

[DammitVictor]

It's fake news created by AI.

Sure. I'm just saying that it doesn't mean it's impossible, and Hasbro's denial doesn't mean it isn't happening or won't happen
It's only probably not true at this point.

The reason it got picked up by the AI is speculation from someone with a track record of calling decelopments in advance. He didn't think it was happening when he said it, but the reasons he suggested it might happen are still valid.

I'm not hoping for it, either. I'm just saying it wouldn't be the end of the world.

[Mastikator]

Sure. I'm just saying that it doesn't mean it's impossible, and Hasbro's denial doesn't mean it isn't happening or won't happen
It's only probably not true at this point.

The reason it got picked up by the AI is speculation from someone with a track record of calling decelopments in advance. He didn't think it was happening when he said it, but the reasons he suggested it might happen are still valid.

I'm not hoping for it, either. I'm just saying it wouldn't be the end of the world.

It's literally made up by an AI, pure fabrication. Do not fret over fake news.

[Boci]

It's literally made up by an AI, pure fabrication. Do not fret over fake news.

Some people are going to watch and engage with speculation/predictions from an industry analyze with a good track record for calling stuff because they find it interesting. Telling people "not to fret" over such stuff is useless at best and patronizing at worse.

[Dr.Samurai]

It's literally made up by an AI, pure fabrication. Do not fret over fake news.
The only people fretting are you and Psyren. Chill. Let people talk about what they want to talk about.

WotC does not need you to go around silencing people or suggesting they are being irrational for discussing something completely rational.

Unless you're both Pinkertons. In which case, please accept my sincerest regrets and please don't knock on my door.

[Blatant Beast]

Sure. I'm just saying that it doesn't mean it's impossible, and Hasbro's denial doesn't mean it isn't happening or won't happen
It's only probably not true at this point.

This strikes me as Flat Earther type reasoning. Tencent, is a huge Chinese corporation that licenses I.P. From many different sources, including Hasbro.

Swapping out a large American Corporation, that is bound by US Laws, and the actions of US Investors, for a Chinese D&D Company is plainly a situation that is NOT better for North American D&D Players.

If you think Hasbro does not listen to you, Tencent definitely will not, because of the differences in business culture alone, let alone societal culture.


The only people fretting are you and Psyren. Chill. Let people talk about what they want to talk about.

Freedom of speech, does not and frankly, should not, mean people can post or say what they want, without pushback.

Lots, and lots of people grasped on to a poorly sourced story, and now have egg on their face. Accept it and learn from it. Please, do not tell me, to not point out you have egg on your face, when yolk is dripping down one’s face. People are free to have beliefs, but other people are also free to disagree with your beliefs, and in matters of factual importance, facts do matter.

YouTube, and RPG ‘Journalists’, are lousy. They did no due diligence….they we re talking out of their asses. To use a Pex-ism, why propagate some Donkey Nonsense?

Why do people want to propagate Donkey nonsense?

[Boci]

Freedom of speech, does not and frankly, should not, mean people can post or say what they want, without pushback.

And if the push back is incorrect, then you can expect that to be pointed out. DammitVictor made it clear they were not focusing on the AI story, but the original story from, from a human analyst with a good track record for predicting this stuff. After that has been clarified "It's AI let is go" is not only rude, but factually incorrect to say.

[Mastikator]

Me, with egg on my face, telling people to learn from my mistake and not get egg on their face, being interpreted as hypocritical attacks, and not advice.

It perfectly encapsulates the very essence of this forum. Why attribute to stupidity when you can attribute to malice? Charity is for suckers.

[Boci]

Me, with egg on my face, telling people to learn from my mistake and not get egg on their face, being interpreted as hypocritical attacks, and not advice.

It perfectly encapsulates the very essence of this forum. Why attribute to stupidity when you can attribute to malice? Charity is for suckers.

When you're advice is "ignore this thing you seem to be interested in because I told you to ignore it", yeah that's typically not going to be taken well no. That's "perfectly encapsulates" most human attitudes as a whole. Your "advice" was not going to appreciate outside the forum either.

[Dr.Samurai]

This strikes me as Flat Earther type reasoning.
Yikes...

Freedom of speech, does not and frankly, should not, mean people can post or say what they want, without pushback.
Agreed. Brace yourself for some more pushback.

Lots, and lots of people grasped on to a poorly sourced story, and now have egg on their face. Accept it and learn from it. Please, do not tell me, to not point out you have egg on your face, when yolk is dripping down one’s face. People are free to have beliefs, but other people are also free to disagree with your beliefs, and in matters of factual importance, facts do matter.
It is absolutely and abundantly clear to anyone that doesn't have this particular chip on their shoulder, as you do, that people here are aware of the AI article after it was linked to, and chose to continue the conversation NOT to contradict the revelation of the AI but to clarify where the AI got it from in the first place.

Psyren implying that the most mild of speculation is "spiraling", Mastikor telling people that are not fretting "not to fret" and you accusing people of Flat Eartherism and telling people who clearly understand that an AI wrote an article to "learn from it" is the only egg on anyone's face in this thread.

Grow up. Nobody cares if you're sick and tired of internet misinformation. Nobody cares if speculation about WotC annoys you. You don't get to bully people online for pointing out factual truths. Psyren's comment that because WotC tweeted a statement to the contrary there's nothing to talk about DOES NOT in fact mean that something isn't happening, hence the clarification from someone else that a company has many reasons to not want to admit that they are shopping the IP around. Answering this with "keep spiraling" is unreasonable. DammitVictor was very clear that someone had speculated about this with reasoning (and a track record) before the AI article picked it up, and pointed out as a matter of TRUTH that simply because an AI picked up the article doesn't mean this isn't a possibility.

You can disagree, but take your self-righteous internet admonishment elsewhere.

And remember, it goes both ways. Lots and lots of people say "Nothing to see here, don't worry about it" and wind up with egg on their face. It's always good to be skeptical. But people confusing a mild and harmless conversation with some sort of wild conspiracy theory that needs to get shut down is not rational behavior. There is nothing reasonable with the stance of "don't talk about something unless we have hard evidence about it, and if you do you're a bad guy".

[Psyren]

And my point continues to be proven.


The only people fretting are you and Psyren. Chill. Let people talk about what they want to talk about.

I'm neither 'fretting' nor stopping anyone :smallsmile: the community is free to ruminate on all the AI-generated "news" they like, as I said in my previous post.

I even allowed for the (rather slim) possibility that this fabricated story could result in an executive saying "hey, maybe we should look into this." To reiterate, stranger things have happened.



Lots, and lots of people grasped on to a poorly sourced story, and now have egg on their face. Accept it and learn from it. Please, do not tell me, to not point out you have egg on your face, when yolk is dripping down one’s face. People are free to have beliefs, but other people are also free to disagree with your beliefs, and in matters of factual importance, facts do matter.

Increasingly, I'm beginning to think that no, they do not. But don't let that get you down - in the words of the Bard himself, "the truth will out" - eventually, anyway. It might just take a bit longer in some hobby circles.

[Boci]

I'm neither 'fretting' nor stopping anyone :smallsmile: the community is free to ruminate on all the AI-generated "news" they like, as I said in my previous post.

It wasn't just AI generated. A human, who apparently has a good track record with the things, said whilst unlikely it could happen. AI then picked it up and that's how it got here, but the origin wasn't AI.

Which part of the above do you have a problem with? Because the human component had been stated repeatedly, and you keep framing it as solely an AI thing.

[Psyren]

It wasn't just AI generated. A human, who apparently has a good track record with the things, said whilst unlikely it could happen. AI then picked it up and that's how it got here, but the origin wasn't AI.

Which part of the above do you have a problem with? Because the human component had been stated repeatedly, and you keep framing it as solely an AI thing.

The part where the AI was unable to distinguish between speculation and leaked talks, and presented the story uncritically and confidently as the latter.

And I never denied there was a human element; I even spelled out what the human element most likely was in the timeline I posted above. But I still stand by the "AI-generated" description of the affair more broadly.

[Boci]

The part where the AI was unable to distinguish between speculation and leaked talks, and presented the story uncritically and confidently as the latter.

And I never denied there was a human element; I even spelled out what the human element most likely was in the timeline I posted above. But I still stand by the "AI-generated" description of the affair more broadly.

So you refuse to accept that the people still interesting this matter understand and dismiss the AI component and want to focus on the human component. That seems doesn't seem like a reasonable stance. That like refusing to accept you can have a discussion about Dracula without vampires.

[Dr.Samurai]

Me, with egg on my face, telling people to learn from my mistake and not get egg on their face, being interpreted as hypocritical attacks, and not advice.

It perfectly encapsulates the very essence of this forum. Why attribute to stupidity when you can attribute to malice? Charity is for suckers.
Interesting take.

DammitVictor agreed with you that the article was made from AI, but then explained that that AI article was actually based on someone musing about a sale of D&D to Tencent, and that this person has a reputation for making correct predictions.

You then went on to reply that it was "pure fabrication", quoting the very post that explains why it isn't "pure fabrication". Then you told him not to fret, despite the fact that DammitVictor indicated the exact opposite of fretting, saying he wouldn't mind the sale, and likely a sale of D&D to anyone would probably be beneficial to players. Seems to me you could have been more clear if you didn't want to appear like you were completely ignoring what DammitVictor said and trying to shut down conversation.

Up next, Psyren is pretending that some point he thinks he has made is being proven, and that facts don't matter, as if people have denied the AI article and are convinced a sale is happening.

There's a word for what you're all doing, but I'll get reported for using it, as these shenanigans are unfortunately protected on this forum.

There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, a lot of clickbait titles, a lot of people that take whatever they hear and see at face value without checking. It's a problem. But this attitude that you guys are exhibiting, this sort of faux skepticism that attacks anyone that questions or speculates on anything, is also a problem. I remember some people here with this same attitude during the OGL debacle telling everyone not to believe their lying eyes, right up until WotC admitted to what they were doing, issued an apology, and did a complete 180.

This notion that we can't simultaneously understand that the rumor is AI-based, and also continue talking about the possibility of a sale is just wrong, and another step in trying to make people think they can't walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Have a little more faith in your fellows, or perhaps a little less ego, so you can stop pretending people are doing something they're not and like you're the smartest guys in the thread.

[Psyren]

So you refuse to accept that the people still interesting this matter understand and dismiss the AI component and want to focus on the human component. That seems doesn't seem like a reasonable stance. That like refusing to accept you can have a discussion about Dracula without vampires.

My description of the overall controversy as "AI-generated" does not stop you from focusing on the human component. Again, feel free to discuss anything you wish. I actually found Stephen's original video (the one the scraper allegedly picked up on) to be interesting.

[Boci]

My description of the overall controversy as "AI-generated" does not stop you from focusing on the human component.

You called it AI "news", despite multiple clarification that people were focusing on the human component (and smugly noted "And my point continues to be proven.") Among other things.

If you didn't intend to sneer at everyone still interesting in discussing the human component of this story, then boy did you choose your words poorly.

[TrueAlphaGamer]

This strikes me as Flat Earther type reasoning. Tencent, is a huge Chinese corporation that licenses I.P. From many different sources, including Hasbro.

Swapping out a large American Corporation, that is bound by US Laws, and the actions of US Investors, for a Chinese D&D Company is plainly a situation that is NOT better for North American D&D Players.

If you think Hasbro does not listen to you, Tencent definitely will not, because of the differences in business culture alone, let alone societal culture.

This is an insane argument. Large corporations are not anyone's "friends", they are there to make a profit. Hasbro (and Wizards, for that matter) is not a paragon of western/American culture or ideals, and pretty much any portrayal of such on their part is mostly virtue signaling and pandering.

This sort of transfer would (in the vast, vast majority of cases) lead to a neutral outcome, perhaps slightly positive or negative depending on one's own perspective. In the short term, it would be a maintenance of the status quo. In the long term, there might be a refinement of the monetization formula, or more efficient marketing (you can see how other companies do quite well under the thumb of Tencent). Nothing earth shattering. Profit is still the goal, and no foreign boogieman that one can construct will deviate from that.


YouTube, and RPG ‘Journalists’, are lousy. They did no due diligence….they we re talking out of their asses. To use a Pex-ism, why propagate some Donkey Nonsense?

Water is wet. At this point it's still interesting to consider it as a hypothetical situation, regardless of how reliable the original source is.

[Psyren]

Water is wet. At this point it's still interesting to consider it as a hypothetical situation, regardless of how reliable the original source is.

And that's 100% fine, consider away. Whether I personally believe there's a lot to discuss about this hypothetical situation doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.


You called it AI "news", despite multiple clarification that people were focusing on the human component (and smugly noted "And my point continues to be proven.") Among other things.

If you didn't intend to sneer at everyone still interesting in discussing the human component of this story, then boy did you choose your words poorly.

I called it AI "news", air quotes included, because that's genuinely how I see this story. My general amusement at/fascination with the unique circumstances of this whole thing doesn't stop anyone from discussing said human component either, but if expressing said amusement offended anyone I do apologize for that.

So are we going to actually talk about the hypothetical situation itself now?

[Blatant Beast]

You can disagree, but take your self-righteous internet admonishment elsewhere..

No.

The Pandaily, article appeared in my news feed days before the YT vids came out. I read the article, and thought “What the F, is Pandaily”, and then dismissed the article because I could not verify the source.

Identifying the credibility and accuracy of source material is a basic plank of critical thinking.


This is an insane argument. Large corporations are not anyone's "friends", they are there to make a profit.

I made no claim about Fictitious Persons being friends or foes. I am pointing out that a business like Hasbro, that is incorporated in Rhode Island, operates under laws that are a lot more familiar to the North American members of this message board, then the laws of Shenzhen, China, where Tencent is incorporated.

Chevrolet tried selling a car in Mexico, named Nova. A name which can be made into No Va, in Spanish, which means No Go, literally.🤦

Business Schools case studies are replete with tales of corporate blunders that occur, in part due to lack of cultural awareness. The Chevy No Go is one of them.

I do not see this “insanity” you speak of…I see a common sense point.

[Darth Credence]

Chevrolet tried selling a car in Mexico, named Nova. A name which can be made into No Va, in Spanish, which means No Go, literally.🤦

Business Schools case studies are replete with tales of corporate blunders that occur, in part due to lack of cultural awareness. The Chevy No Go is one of them.

I do not see this “insanity” you speak of…I see a common sense point.

Since facts matter - this is an urban legend. The Nova sold just fine in Latin America. The idea that people in Latin America would see Nova and read it as no va is on par with an English speaker reading carpet as car pet and laughing when you want to line your floor with animals.

[Blatant Beast]

Since facts matter - this is an urban legend. The Nova sold just fine in Latin America. The idea that people in Latin America would see Nova and read it as no va is on par with an English speaker reading carpet as car pet and laughing when you want to line your floor with animals.

I never claimed the car did not sell…I am claiming it was mocked because of the name.
(It was).

The real point I am making is: The non Spanish speaking C-suite in Detroit, did not consider that English branding might not have the same impact in a different country as compared to the US.

These types of misunderstandings, are common, which is why diplomacy is difficult, and why D&D if directed and guided by a Chinese company would probably operate differently.

Again, this does not seem to be a radical claim, to me.

[Darth Credence]

I never claimed the car did not sell…I am claiming it was mocked because of the name.
(It was).

The real point I am making is: The non Spanish speaking C-suite in Detroit, did not consider that English branding might not have the same impact in a different country as compared to the US.

These types of misunderstandings, are common, which is why diplomacy is difficult, and why D&D if directed and guided by a Chinese company would probably operate differently.

Again, this does not seem to be a radical claim, to me.

The entire thing is an urban legend. The car was not made fun of for the name. It was just a car.

https://www.thoughtco.com/chevy-nova-that-wouldnt-go-3078090

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanish/

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2017/04/07/fact-check-the-nova-did-not-sell-poorly-in-latin-america-due-to-its-name

The C-suite in Detroit absolutely did consider it, and dismissed it as unimportant. Because it was. This entire thing is an urban legend. Facts matter, don't they?

[Blatant Beast]

Yep.

Yet again, we have evidence that on should not listen to the vox populi, because oft repeated stories are often enough full of 💩.

The moral is double check everything. Again, is that a radical claim?
Are there anymore nits to pick?

[Psyren]

I'm still waiting for all the people who claimed to understand that the AI-generated (fine, AI-propagated, if that's more palatable?) story was fake, but still expressed that they wanted to talk about the possibility of a D&D sale to Tencent - i.e. the thread's topic - from a purely hypothetical standpoint.

I'll even get the ball rolling with a question: what would Tencent bring to the table in such a partnership besides a parent company that is far less susceptible to the ongoing and systemic post-pandemic weaknesses of the toy market than Hasbro are?

I haven't seen anything indicating Tencent are interested in D&D as a property, though I could have easily missed something. And even if they were to make the unlikely move of just handing the reins to Larian with minimal oversight, Larian themselves seem to want to switch their creative energy to non-D&D projects, at least for the time being. It seems to me that at best, Tencent would just slap D&D branding onto their core business of mobile games that they're already flooding the market with. Moreover, they've been having big layoffs of their own too, and forcing their subsidiaries like Riot to do the same. I myself joked that they probably wouldn't do a worse job than Hasbro, but if people think D&D would be clearly better off, could they explain why?

[Dr.Samurai]

No.

The Pandaily, article appeared in my news feed days before the YT vids came out. I read the article, and thought “What the F, is Pandaily”, and then dismissed the article because I could not verify the source.

Identifying the credibility and accuracy of source material is a basic plank of critical thinking.
I agree with you 100%. The problem is that what you just said has nothing to do with what you're currently doing in this thread.

No one has come here AFTER Psyren disclosed the AI source of the articles and said "No, I still believe it's real and it's going to happen!! Sources don't matter!". You are mistaking ongoing discussion for some denial of reality, and you are WRONG to do so.

So either you are making the argument that acknowledging an AI source but continuing to discuss the possibility is equivalent to being duped by the AI source, or you are mistaken.

I made no claim about Fictitious Persons being friends or foes. I am pointing out that a business like Hasbro, that is incorporated in Rhode Island, operates under laws that are a lot more familiar to the North American members of this message board, then the laws of Shenzhen, China, where Tencent is incorporated.

Chevrolet tried selling a car in Mexico, named Nova. A name which can be made into No Va, in Spanish, which means No Go, literally.🤦

Business Schools case studies are replete with tales of corporate blunders that occur, in part due to lack of cultural awareness. The Chevy No Go is one of them.

I do not see this “insanity” you speak of…I see a common sense point.
Speaking of people having egg on their face... (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanish/)

[Crusher]

It's time for a revolt of the Luddites.

Butlerian Jihad, incoming.

Edit - Honestly, I'd be more surprised if we *didn't* have something along these lines, or some kind of officially sanctioned *massive* restrictions on AI (probably with modest violence/property damage albeit not outright war), than if we did over the next several decades. Borderline inevitable.

Edit2 - Not that anyone really still thinks this is all a thing, but if Tencent did buy D&D, they'd probably just want the game development rights. Because they publish video games, not books, electronic or otherwise. They'd probably find D&DBeyond mildly interesting (in theory, its kind of an MMO, right? Sort of?) but hardly worth their time. The rights to the game itself they *might* hang onto just to keep an eye on it, but they'd probably leave it with Hasbro or sell to Paizo or something albeit with the right to buy it back if they start doing something unacceptable with it.

[Dr.Samurai]

It's time for a revolt of the Luddites.

Butlerian Jihad, incoming.
You guys are overreacting. Now, if you'll excuse me...

https://i.makeagif.com/media/4-16-2021/xZIeaJ.gif

[Psyren]

Edit2 - Not that anyone really still thinks this is all a thing, but if Tencent did buy D&D, they'd probably just want the game development rights. Because they publish video games, not books, electronic or otherwise. They'd probably find D&DBeyond mildly interesting (in theory, its kind of an MMO, right? Sort of?) but hardly worth their time. The rights to the game itself they *might* hang onto just to keep an eye on it, but they'd probably leave it with Hasbro or sell to Paizo or something albeit with the right to buy it back if they start doing something unacceptable with it.

(Crusher I just want to say I appreciate you actually attempting to discuss the topic, rather than discussing the discussion, or discussing the right to have the discussion, or policing how to have the discussion of the discussion, or calling out other posters by name, or arming for the impending AI wars etc.)

I highly doubt buying it only to sell it to Paizo would be in the cards. If Paizo can't afford the IP now from Hasbro directly even in the latter's supposedly dire straits - which they can't - they definitely wouldn't be able to afford it after it was bought by an intermediary who'd be expecting a return on their investment and thus mark up the price.

On the video game point, I agree with you - as I said in my previous post, if Tencent saw any value in the IP at all, it would purely be as a recognizable sticker to slap onto their usual mobile game pablum. The truly talented studios in their orbit like Larian and Riot have too much else going on with their own IPs to steward D&D as a whole. The tabletop arm of the business would likely be left to languish on the vine to an even greater degree than Hasbro, which is at least a boardgame company, would allow.

[DammitVictor]

I'm still waiting for all the people who claimed to understand that the AI-generated [...] story was fake, but still expressed that they wanted to talk about the possibility of a D&D sale to Tencent - i.e. the thread's topic - from a purely hypothetical standpoint.

Was I not perfectly clear on this point?


I'll even get the ball rolling with a question: what would Tencent bring to the table in such a partnership [...]

They own thirty percent of Larian and have a massive foothold in the Chinese market. This would explain both their interest and what they bring to the table. Movies. videogames, television... they're equipped to do what Gygax, WotC, and fans have been dreaming about since the 80s.

If they persuaded 1% of the population to pick up the tabletop game, that would be 14 million new players; 1% of that number would be 140,000 new customers and publishers on DMsGuild; 1% of that number could be 1,400 new Chinese-language publishers whose works are being translated into English. Maybe my estimates are too generous.

They basically have all the tools they need to do what Hasbro has been burning their own house down to accomplish.

There's no reason to assume that they're any better than any average publicly-traded company, but there's already plenty of evidence that Hasbro is far worse than that average. Regression to the Mean is also on our side.

edit: And to be clear, this isn't the outcome I'm hoping for. This isn't my best case scenario. This is just me looking for silver linings in some dark clouds, and counting my blessings to have found some.

[Psyren]

Was I not perfectly clear on this point?

You were adamant about what you believed, so I didn't see much point in disagreeing with it. After all, a firm denial doesn't mean anything :smalltongue::smallbiggrin:

Less cheekily, I was unaware that Stephen even did many predictions, much less having a track record for accurate ones. He gets a lot of industry veterans on his podcast and they tend to be the ones with inside baseball to share, but the video in question consisted of him purely spitballing off the cuff to camera by himself. And even if his predictions were all bangers, this wasn't even that, so much as one man's "hey, wouldn't it be cool if...?"


They own thirty percent of Larian and have a massive foothold in the Chinese market. This would explain both their interest and what they bring to the table. Movies. videogames, television... they're equipped to do what Gygax, WotC, and fans have been dreaming about since the 80s.

If they persuaded 1% of the population to pick up the tabletop game, that would be 14 million new players; 1% of that number would be 140,000 new customers and publishers on DMsGuild; 1% of that number could be 1,400 new Chinese-language publishers whose works are being translated into English. Maybe my estimates are too generous.

They basically have all the tools they need to do what Hasbro has been burning their own house down to accomplish.

There's no reason to assume that they're any better than any average publicly-traded company, but there's already plenty of evidence that Hasbro is far worse than that average. Regression to the Mean is also on our side.

edit: And to be clear, this isn't the outcome I'm hoping for. This isn't my best case scenario. This is just me looking for silver linings in some dark clouds, and counting my blessings to have found some.

So, this is a common mistake or trap made about the Chinese market - they're seen as so populous/vast that even 1% conversion represents serious growth that will definitely be worth the expense of trying to cut through all the bureaucracy, cultural headwinds, and other barriers to entry to expand and localize product offerings there. Even a behemoth like Tencent can't make just anything succeed there.

The main issue for D&D specifically is that IP rights over there are pretty fraught; even if 1% of the mainland population could be successfully converted into being TTRPG fans - not remotely a cheap proposition - the far more likely result of that would be a near 100% piracy rate of anything they localize rather than people spending money on gamebooks and subscriptions. It's not like playing D&D needs special server architecture that only Tencent would be able to provide or anything; all you really need for the core game is video chat and some dice. So you would need an entirely different business model for that market, likely a new product entirely.

And speaking of those cultural headwinds, they're pretty numerous, including things like 996 work environment and similarly leisure-free school culture that would make a longform hobby like D&D a hard sell for students and adults alike, as well as stringent censorship laws ranging from language use and subject matter to even representing images of things like skeletons - but I can't elaborate further on any of those, as it's intertwined with their political environment.

TL;DR the best case scenario is that Larian gets stewardship of the IP, feels like shelving their other products to do something with it, but those offerings would likely be CRPG-aligned to play to their strengths, and Tencent largely stays out of the way. The worst case scenario is that Tencent sees the IP purely as a sticker they can put on their mobile games for sale in the West (unlikely to see release in the Chinese market), dispenses with that whole silly pen and paper side of the business, and we're stuck with either old/static editions or moving on to new games entirely. I'd take Hasbro over that.

[Kane0]

I suppose it would be a net decrease in player engagement over time, but maybe the books would be a better quality? Not the content, like the physical product.

[Dr.Samurai]

(Crusher I just want to say I appreciate you actually attempting to discuss the topic, rather than discussing the discussion, or discussing the right to have the discussion, or policing how to have the discussion of the discussion, or calling out other posters by name, or arming for the impending AI wars etc.)
Tells people to move on from the conversation, they're spiraling because they want to continue having the conversation, and that facts don't matter for those that are still having the conversation. Then laments that others are trying to police the conversation. AI has more self awareness than this...

I suppose it would be a net decrease in player engagement over time, but maybe the books would be a better quality? Not the content, like the physical product.
According to this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUFUwLM3xRI&t=259s&ab_channel=DungeonCraft) that just dropped... physical published books may be for collectors only pretty soon.

No, I didn't check sources. You're all big boys and girls and can figure it out for yourselves :smallamused:.

[TrueAlphaGamer]

I made no claim about Fictitious Persons being friends or foes. I am pointing out that a business like Hasbro, that is incorporated in Rhode Island, operates under laws that are a lot more familiar to the North American members of this message board, then the laws of Shenzhen, China, where Tencent is incorporated.

I suppose the same risk was true when those yuppies from Seattle bought out the D&D lineage back in '97, supplanting the TRVE TABLETOP GAMER CULTURE of our Humble and Pious Lake Geneva with their evil, coastal, card-peddling ways. 3rd and 4th and 5th editions must have been failed releases that completely ostracized the core gaming groups of D&D!!

You can slice "cultural differences" down to any level of granularity, but the fact is that worrying about that makes no sense when there isn't an incentive for any buyer to impose their culture and alienate their consumers. Occam's razor, and such . . .

What laws would even matter in this instance? Where does this great legal difference come from? The vast, vast majority of consumers could not appreciate a difference in the legal systems by which one company or another operates. It simply doesn't matter for most daily proceedings. Regardless, the brand would still likely be tied to WotC - they have the capital to keep publishing it, after all - and at that point, whether it's ruled from Shenzhen or Pawtucket, you'll still have D&D, you'll still get Pinkerton knocking on your door, and the logo will still change to rainbow colors for one month out of the year.

Even besides that, Chinese people aren't some strange "other". They aren't particularly hostile or exotic. You can see Chinese culture (corporate and otherwise) incorporating quite well into American culture all over the place - apps, video games, etc.

[Leon]

They couldn't do a worse job but its hard to believe it would get better.

[Brookshw]

What laws would even matter in this instance? Where does this great legal difference come from? The vast, vast majority of consumers could not appreciate a difference in the legal systems by which one company or another operates. It simply doesn't matter for most daily proceedings.

It's moot, the actions of foreign entities within the US are governed by US law, the talk about foreign law is misguided.

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: closed for review.