Wizards of the Coast, Dungeon and Dragons. Question.

whoregut

I was wondering if someone had some inside about this. Dungeon and Dragons is a product of Wizards of the Coast. Does Cryptic own the rights to D&D now or just leasing it to make the game? If Wizards doesn't like the product that was made by Cryptic or run by PW, could they pull D&D rights from them?

ambisinisterr

Everything in the game has to be approved by Wizards of the Coast.

If WotC don't like a piece of content they will send it back to the drawing board. And they have the final say.

Andy Valasquez, Lead Producer, once stated that one of the key issues Wizards was particularly keen on was making sure the martial abilities appeared martial and not magical. I believe this was discussed during the second NOCS.


EDIT - Cryptic has weekly conference calls with Wizards of the Coast every Tuesday (If memory serves). They work together very closely together on all phases of development.

spudvicious

Wizards of the Coast continues to own the D&D brand, but they have given Cryptic a pretty big license to produce this game using their intellectual assets. I don't know the details of the contract itself, but generally, there are conditions that would allow the owner (WotC) to pull the license, but those conditions (if they exist) are usually very extreme. The more likely scenario, if WotC is dissatisfied, would be that they simply would not award further licenses to PWE/Cryptic, especially after the current one expires (likely several years from now).

Obviously, I don't know the actual details involved, but this is the most common situation as I've observed in general with these sorts of things.

I can say that it is very likely that the... liberties that Cryptic has taken with D&D lore (and there have been quite a few) are not enough to get the license revoked. it's entirely possible that even the game just plain failing would not get the license revoked, but that would probably be at least part of the formula for such a thing.

dardove

ambisinisterr wrote: »

Andy Valasquez, Lead Producer, once stated that one of the key issues Wizards was particularly keen on was making sure the martial abilities appeared martial and not magical. I believe this was discussed during the second NOCS.

So for example, a rogue (being a martial class) shouldn't have an ability that makes daggers magically appear out of the ground near him...

arcmoon99

dardove wrote: »

So for example, a rogue (being a martial class) shouldn't have an ability that makes daggers magically appear out of the ground near him...

I agree with this one. All the other TR encounters and dailies can have some logical, martial explanation, because the TR is resembles a typical ninja in a lot of ways, but this encounter I've got nothing lol. It just doesn't make sense and seems a little too magical for the rouge.

dddeemm

ambisinisterr wrote: »

Everything in the game has to be approved by Wizards of the Coast.

If WotC don't like a piece of content they will send it back to the drawing board. And they have the final say.

Andy Valasquez, Lead Producer, once stated that one of the key issues Wizards was particularly keen on was making sure the martial abilities appeared martial and not magical. I believe this was discussed during the second NOCS.


EDIT - Cryptic has weekly conference calls with Wizards of the Coast every Tuesday (If memory serves). They work together very closely together on all phases of development.

Wait so why does the Guardian Fighter gets bigger in one of his dailies and several powers of the Great Weapon Fighter have magic-like sfx

whoregut

This might be fun to look into.

kancilking

1 : What's up with the npc mob drows? They're huge by D&D standards. Same height as my human and they seems so muscular lol.
2 : Is there such thing as a dual wielding dagger/sword mind flayer in D&D world?

Thanks

valwryn

dardove wrote: »

So for example, a rogue (being a martial class) shouldn't have an ability that makes daggers magically appear out of the ground near him...

Think of it as a trap set by the rogue and sprung by the foe....then it makes sense :rolleyes:

ambisinisterr

Drow are 5'4" to 6'
Humans are 5'6 to 6'2"

Drow are no longer much shorter than humans. They simply have different body structures.

As for the mindflayers, it's not against the lore. I agree there should be a more wizard focus but there's no ruling that mindflayers must be wizards.

ambisinisterr

dddeemm wrote: »

Wait so why does the Guardian Fighter gets bigger in one of his dailies and several powers of the Great Weapon Fighter have magic-like sfx

It's intimidating. He 'appears' to get bigger and stronger. It's a perception. A sisual trick just like how your parents used to look bigger when they were angry and you used to feel smaller.

Fear is a fickle friend.

spudvicious

dardove wrote: »

So for example, a rogue (being a martial class) shouldn't have an ability that makes daggers magically appear out of the ground near him...

I'm still wondering about the rogue teleportation thing, myself. I can understand that the stealth is not literal invisibility, but the TR ability to teleport to people, friend or foe, seems rather magical to me. I like the ability, and I most certainly make use of it, but it has always struck me as incongruous with a supposedly nonmagical class.

koboldbard2

spudvicious wrote: »

I'm still wondering about the rogue teleportation thing, myself. I can understand that the stealth is not literal invisibility, but the TR ability to teleport to people, friend or foe, seems rather magical to me. I like the ability, and I most certainly make use of it, but it has always struck me as incongruous with a supposedly nonmagical class.

They 'appear' to teleport, it's a perception, a visual trick. Totally non-magical!

/or not.

evilderprimus88

spudvicious wrote: »

I'm still wondering about the rogue teleportation thing, myself. I can understand that the stealth is not literal invisibility, but the TR ability to teleport to people, friend or foe, seems rather magical to me. I like the ability, and I most certainly make use of it, but it has always struck me as incongruous with a supposedly nonmagical class.

It is magical, just as enhanced speed while in stealth. If someone is sneaking you'd expect them to move slower. In before "derp it's a game deal with it" - I will, if my class will gain certain "magical non-magical" abilities as well.

aerisod

evilderprimus88 wrote: »

It is magical, just as enhanced speed while in stealth. If someone is sneaking you'd expect them to move slower. In before "derp it's a game deal with it" - I will, if my class will gain certain "magical non-magical" abilities as well.

Nonononononono their speed isn't really enhanced while in stealth. They only appear to move faster. It's a perception, a visual trick just like how your parents used to appear to move faster when they were hiding from you.

bpskibbenheims

aerisod wrote: »

... just like how your parents used to appear to move faster when they were hiding from you.

I gotta say this made me chuckle.

fovrel

A thrue melee class would be rather be dull, I think. You have a swing and a stabb. A shield wearer can use his shield of course. A non magical ranged class, the ranger, can ... shoot of course. Yet I really don't like it when a ranged/non ranged fighter class can do all kinds of fancy stuff, so it becomes a sort of magic class.

That growing big thing I don't like either. I like to play the small races, dwarves and halflings, because they are short, so don't make them tall. Don't change my character.

As a matter of fact the whole magic/non magic thing is a bit silly. Take the GWF. You can swing your big sword arround, you can hit or miss, but neverr hit your buddy. There is no friendly fire. This make all combat magic.