Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
You're giving money to a shitty company that just last month tried to scam you and only backed off because of a weeklong customer revolt vs
You're giving money to a shitty company that just last month tried to scam you and only backed off because of a weeklong customer revolt

I am giving money to the company because I want to see an entertaining movie about a hobby I love.
 
Does Hasbro actually get a percentage of the take, or were they just paid a flat licensing fee?
 
I feel like percentage of the take plus the merchandising rights (where the real money for the movie comes from). If Hasbro want's their own cinematic universe they aren't going to basically give the goods away for free.
 
I am cautiously interested to see this. Besides some off term drops it sounds like a good Savage Worlds interpretation.
 
Haven't seen the latest D&D movie, and have no plans to until it is streaming but...

I have a problem with most game based films not because they don't slavishly follow the rules, but mostly because they tend to feel like the writers have never in their life played an RPG or even cracked a book of the source material.

For all its faults at least it was obvious Peter Jackson was a fan of Tolkien, and where I was unhappy I could still mostly put it down to creative differences.

I mean, this was a massive labor of love.

 
I think The Hobbit is such an awful dumpster fire because there is a really great film in there somewhere.

It is like looking in the trash and seeing dinner plate with a perfectly cooked steak and lobster dinner that somebody poured shit on. I bet a good editing job could still make it a decent film of it, just need to cut out about 3 hours of stupid crap that was added.

I've watched a few fan cuts...they d give the hint f what might have been a decent film.

No one has taken the time to cgi proper beards onto all the dwarves yet tho...
I highly recommend this version. It shows just how powerful editing can be and the Hobbit can the editor a lot to work with, even cutting apart major scenes for great effect.

http://www.maple-films.com/
 
I highly recommend this version. It shows just how powerful editing can be and the Hobbit can the editor a lot to work with, even cutting apart major scenes for great effect.

http://www.maple-films.com/


I cant tell if that's one I've seen yet, but the clips seem pretty well done. I'll give it a shot.
 
Yes, but the proceeds go to Hazbro:shade:.
The basic gist is that Hasbro already got paid. What you spend at the theater goes to the people who produced the D&D movie, not Hasbro. Going forward it may be a different story as Hasbro has its own in-house production house. And if you pay to see the movie in the UK or Canada then Hasbro will be getting a cut of the distributor's share.


 
Last edited:
OSR dorks: "Don't give money to Hasbro they hate you!"

Hasbro: "Hay guise we're gonna do something incredibly stupid that will break our stranglehold on the industry and the hobby as a whole, hope you don't mind."

OSR dorks: "NOOOOOOOO!!! ANYTHING BUT THAT!!!! WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!"

Reminds me of a story my wife told me about when she was DJing at a classic rock station. Someone called in to complain that the station was playing Hotel California for the millionth time. She asked him if he had ever called in to request something that wasn't Hotel California. Or anything, for that matter. He replied that he hadn't. "Your fault, then," she said, and hung up.
 
The basic gist is that Hasbro already got paid. What you spend at the theater goes to the people who produced the D&D movie, not Hasbro. Going forward it may be a different story as Hasbro has its own in-house production house. And if you pay to see the movie in the UK or Canada then Hasbro will be getting a cut of the distributor's share.


Then probably applies to the EU as well:thumbsup:!
 
I feel like the larger gist is that Hasbro backed down and that means that D&Ders should revel in their influence over their hobby.

Because if they never buy anything again, Hasbro will never pay attention to their customers again.
 
OSR dorks: "Don't give money to Hasbro they hate you!"

Hasbro: "Hay guise we're gonna do something incredibly stupid that will break our stranglehold on the industry and the hobby as a whole, hope you don't mind."

OSR dorks: "NOOOOOOOO!!! ANYTHING BUT THAT!!!! WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!"

Reminds me of a story my wife told me about when she was DJing at a classic rock station. Someone called in to complain that the station was playing Hotel California for the millionth time. She asked him if he had ever called in to request something that wasn't Hotel California. Or anything, for that matter. He replied that he hadn't. "Your fault, then," she said, and hung up.
Hey, I absolutely welcomed Hasbro's OGL fuckup, pretty openly.

I'm just sad they rowed back before doing irrepearable damage.
 
I wonder at geeks who want to see the thing they love destroyed.
I don't love D&D-the-brand and think the hobby would be a better place if its market dominance was shattered (hopefully leading to no single dominant RPG rather then a new contender). I'm also fully aware that the original aim of the OGL was to cement D&D's market dominance and destroy its competitors. (I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory but I'm directly paraphrasing Dancey).

It's nothing against current 5e players, merely that I'm realistic to recognise that the current position of D&D is entirely incompatible with my ideal RPG scene. (I will however accept charges of utopianism on the latter).
 
I don't love D&D-the-brand and think the hobby would be a better place if its market dominance was shattered (hopefully leading to no single dominant RPG rather then a new contender). I'm also fully aware that the original aim of the OGL was to cement D&D's market dominance and destroy its competitors. (I know that sounds like a conspiracy theory but I'm directly paraphrasing Dancey).

It's nothing against current 5e players, merely that I'm realistic to recognise that the current position of D&D is entirely incompatible with my ideal RPG scene. (I will however accept charges of utopianism on the latter).

I feel basically different on the subject since I think of Dungeons and Dragons as the ingredients rather than the recipe. It can be used as basically the ability to make anything so it doesn't matter what rules system anyone is using.

In fact, I kind of loved the D20 dominance because it meant almost everyone knew the same rules system and weren't forcing a variety of ones to be learned.

Hasbro's greatest crime was the attack on the OGL and since they backed down, I don't have an issue.
 
I feel basically different on the subject since I think of Dungeons and Dragons as the ingredients rather than the recipe. It can be used as basically the ability to make anything so it doesn't matter what rules system anyone is using.

In fact, I kind of loved the D20 dominance because it meant almost everyone knew the same rules system and weren't forcing a variety of ones to be learned.

Hasbro's greatest crime was the attack on the OGL and since they backed down, I don't have an issue.

See, and I actually think this

it meant almost everyone knew the same rules system and weren't forcing a variety of ones to be learned.

was Hasbro's biggest crime

1679705571394.png
 
Who doesn’t love a good corporate stranglehold on a creative hobby?

I mean...was it?

The whole point of OGL was that the rules were universal but dozens of companies made good money on producing its content and WAY MORE than if they had to make their own systems.

Which is why Hasbo TRIED to get a stranglehold and failed miserably.
 
I wonder at companies that despise the geeks that made their products successful.

Who lost and backed down.

That's the part that gets me. Being victorious doesn't matter. You'd think people would be happy they had an influence.
 
Who lost and backed down.

That's the part that gets me. Being victorious doesn't matter. You'd think people would be happy they had an influence.

I mean, people are free to forgive them or not, I don;t think forgiveness naturally follows from temporary capitulation. Honestly I can't see WotC's continued failure as anything but a potential net positive for the hobby.
 
I mean...was it?

The whole point of OGL was that the rules were universal but dozens of companies made good money on producing its content and WAY MORE than if they had to make their own systems.

Which is why Hasbo TRIED to get a stranglehold and failed miserably.
From Hasbro's point of view, absolutely. And you illustrate that with your comment that:

I kind of loved the D20 dominance because it meant almost everyone knew the same rules system and weren't forcing a variety of ones to be learned.

What you describe there is the explicit goal of the OGL:

Ryan Dancey said:
The logical conclusion says that reducing the "cost" to other people to publishing and supporting the core D&D game to zero should eventually drive support for all other game systems to the lowest level possible in the market, create customer resistance to the introduction of new systems, and the result of all that "support" redirected to the D&D game will be to steadily increase the number of people who play D&D, thus driving sales of the core books

Did they succeed? Not entirely. But I don't think they miserably failed either; the only thing that stopped this working entirely was a) the unexpected commercial failure of 4e and b) the associated rise of Pathfinder. Without that, it would have been a 90% success easily. And to a large extent has been despite the OGL fiasco. D&D is probably bigger than it ever has been before to the point where a significant number of newer players aren't even aware that other games exist.

That's the part that gets me. Being victorious doesn't matter. You'd think people would be happy they had an influence.

Only if "having an influence", regardless of what that influence actually entailed, was the desired goal. And it was for some people; a lot of the D&D fandom just wanted to feel "listened to". But the whole kerfuffle round the OGL hid the fact that there were actually recognisable factions. Not only did they not all share the same goal, there were times their goals conflicted.

The biggest group (and I suspect the one you largely fall into) wanted 5e creators to be able to carry on creating 3rd party content without threat and for 5e players to be able to freely utilise that content. That group definitely won, although there's a question mark hanging over 6e.

There were a small but vocal group of OSR creators who wanted to diminish the possiblity of any threat caused by the fact their work was under the OGL. Partial success there, I think it's fair to say that a sizeable number of those creators have still felt the need to abandon the OGL all together. On the flipside, Pazio and Chaosium have done very well out of it publicity wise (ORC).

Then you have the most fractious group, those who used it as an opening for already existing anti WotC/anti Hasbro agendas. Some of those were indie RPG designers and players hoping to get more eyes on Fishblade. There were the "play another fucking RPG" people who have been pushing that anti D&D line for some time. Old stagers like myself nostalgic for the days where T$R were sneered at in public. People who largely dislike D&D because of an anti mainstream and/or an anti corporate stance. Did we win? Nah, but to be honest that was never really expected despite some "we will destroy D&D" shouty people on Twitter. The main unifed goals were a) to make it easier to get eyes for other games and b) to increase anti WoTc feeling in RPG circles. We did alright on the first although not massively. And had an oversized influence on the second, going by stuff like the D&D meme pages half of whom went anti WotC overnight.

So when you suggest that "victory" logically leads to kissing and making up with Hasbro, you miss that was never the aim of everybody involved in the social media storm in the first place.
 
I mean, people are free to forgive them or not, I don;t think forgiveness naturally follows from temporary capitulation. Honestly I can't see WotC's continued failure as anything but a potential net positive for the hobby.
I don't see "forgiveness" or not as something I care about in the context of a corporation anyway. It's like forgiving the wind.

For me, all that matters is "do I think that D&D being less successful would be positive or negative for how I would like the RPG industry to be" and purely personally the answer is categorically that D&D's influence waning would be a good thing.
 
It's not just newer gamers, either. My group last year ran through several one-shots. FUDGE-based The Unexplained (reskinned for totally-not-X-Files), Troika!, Prime Directive, etc. One of my players, a veteran who's played many games over decades, actually suggested we use 5e. For all of that.

Yeah, no.
 
I think if you honestly expect forgiveness, or rather, if you are honestly sorry, you will make some sincere attempt to change the offending behavior. A corporation may do this, but only for as long as it remains their most profitable option.
 
It's not just newer gamers, either. My group last year ran through several one-shots. FUDGE-based The Unexplained (reskinned for totally-not-X-Files), Troika!, Prime Directive, etc. One of my players, a veteran who's played many games over decades, actually suggested we use 5e. For all of that.

Yeah, no.
I've just politely told a new group that wanted to recruit me that a) I am happy to GM for them at any time and b) will play in pretty much any non 5e campaign someone is running but will politely sit out their 5e games. They're fine with that to be fair. (I do roll my eyes a bit at people who claim they hate 5e and then end up in games of it anyway0.
 
I don't see "forgiveness" or not as something I care about in the context of a corporation anyway. It's like forgiving the wind.
It's more like forgiving a shark for attacking you because you managed to kick it in the nose one time and it went away. Every time it sees an opportunity to do that again, it will do so, unless you make it not worth trying to begin with. A bloody nose is a minor stop at best. If WotC ended up permanently damaged as D&D's owners, with other games collectively taking over the mantle, THAT would be a result that might get noticed.
 
So when you suggest that "victory" logically leads to kissing and making up with Hasbro, you miss that was never the aim of everybody involved in the social media storm in the first place.

Thanks for the explanation! Very informative.
 
In fact, I kind of loved the D20 dominance because it meant almost everyone knew the same rules system and weren't forcing a variety of ones to be learned.

Hasbro's greatest crime was the attack on the OGL and since they backed down, I don't have an issue.
Interesting enough, I hated it for the exact same reason. It didn't help that the rules everybody knew were (and are), useless to me to the point that consider freeform play to be an upgrade:shade:.
 
Interesting enough, I hated it for the exact same reason. It didn't help that the rules everybody knew were (and are), useless to me to the point that consider freeform play to be an upgrade:shade:.

What was your issues?
 
I certainly don't blame D&D for the D&D glut. A lot of people like D&D, and I have no issue with it's popularity. My issue was with the bandwagoners, folks pumping out cheap shit with D20 slapped on it for a quick buck or treating D&D like it was a universal system instead of designing a good game to go with whatever IP and standing by it.

But that's still happening today (*cough*Hellboy*cough*)
 
What was your issues?
You mean, apart from slapping D20 mechanics on top of settings that would have been better served by different systems, everybody wanting to play d20 because it's the New Cool Thing, and the fact that the d20 system has its own set of problems like the LFQW:grin:?
 
100 percent this! I am not a fan of a universal system as the only game I play. I’m ok with having one for pick up games and the like but I prefer to use systems designed for the genre of the game, Barbarians of Lemuria is a great example.
 
100 percent this! I am not a fan of a universal system as the only game I play. I’m ok with having one for pick up games and the like but I prefer to use systems designed for the genre of the game, Barbarians of Lemuria is a great example.
I don't mind universal systems, but d20 is actually an example of the opposite: a system that doesn't work as an universal one due to the multiple in-built assumptions. So when people try to turn it into one, of course it doesn't work.
I do roll my eyes a bit at people who claim they hate 5e and then end up in games of it anyway.
Tell me about it...:grin:
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top