TTRPGS, Blockchains, and NFTs

When Kickstarter announced recently that it would be investing in blockchain-based infrastructure, there was widespread backlash. Blockchain technology is environmentally damaging and is of limited use. Creators such as Possum Creek Games (Wanderhome) announced their intentions to move off Kickstarter, while companies such as Chaosium and Wizards of the Coast continue to express interested in non-fungible tokens, digital items which exist on a blockchain.

While I'm writing this article, I do need to point out that I'm not a great person to do so; my understanding of blockchains, NFTs, cryptocurrencies, and related technologies is very, very limited and my attempts to get a handle on the subject have not been entirely successful. I'm sure more informed people will post in the comments.

What the heck is an NFT (& what does it mean for digital artists)

What is a non-fungible token (NFT)? In this graphic designer's guide to NFTs, we explore how Non-Fungible Tokens work in the context of digital art and how you can start turning your digital creations into sought-after NFTs.

dribbble.com

Kickstarter is not the only tabletop roleplaying game adjacent company delving into such technologies. Call of Cthulhu publisher Chaosium announced in July 2021 that it was working with an NFT company to bring their Mythos content to a digitally collectible market, with specific plans to sell two different models -- the Necromonicon and a bust of Cthulhu -- from the Cthulhu Mythos; and while things went quiet for a while, last week the company tweeted that 'We have more - lots more -- to drop... when the Stars are Right." A Facebook statement from Chaosium's CEO appeared on Twitter talking more about the decision.

D&D producer Wizards of the Coast said in April 2021 that it was considering NFTs for Magic: The Gathering. More recently, an email from WotC's legal representatives to a company planning to use NFT technology in conjunction with M:tG cards, alleging unlawful infringement of its IP, indicated that WotC was "currently evaluating its future plans regarding NFTs and the MAGIC: THE GATHERING cards" but that "no decision has been made at this time."

On Twitter, ErikTheBearik compiled Hasbro/WotC's involvement with NFTs so far.

Gripnr is a '5e based TTRPG NFT protocol' with Stephen Radney-MacFarland (D&D, Star Wars Saga Edition, Pathfinder) as its lead game designer. OK, so that's about as much of that as I understand!

Some company in the TTRPG sphere have taken a stand. DriveThruRPG stated that "In regard to NFTs – We see no use for this technology in our business ever." Itch.io was a bit more emphatic:

A few have asked about our stance on NFTs: NFTs are a scam. If you think they are legitimately useful for anything other than the exploitation of creators, financial scams, and the destruction of the planet the [sic] we ask that [you] please reevaluate your life choices. Peace. [an emoji of a hand making the “Peace” symbol]

Also [expletive deleted] any company that says they support creators and also endorses NFTs in any way. They only care about their own profit and the opportunity for wealth above anyone else. Especially given the now easily available discourse concerning the problems of NFTs.

How can you be so dense?

NFTs -- non-fungible tokens -- and blockchains have been dominating the news recently, and with individuals and companies taking strong stances against them, it's fair to ask why. The environmental impact of the technology has been widely documented - it's inefficient, and the need for blockchains -- a sort of decentralized ledger -- to have multiple users validate and record transactions makes it very energy intensive. In an era when climate change is having more and more devastating effects around the world, use of such technologies attracts considerable backlash.

Other ethical concerns regarding NFTs specifically is that the purchaser of an NFT is not actually purchasing anything, and the value for the digital 'token' they've purchased is speculative. When you buy the NFT of a piece of art (for example) you don't own the art itself; you only own a digital token associated with the art. The whole concept is likened to a 'house of cards' or a 'scam' by its critics.

 

[Athiev]

Yes, if you are buying an NFT, you are buying a "token" . . . how is that different from buying a license? Honest question.

An important difference is that an NFT doesn't automatically include a license. The terms of use of OpenSea, the main NFT marketplace, make clear that NFTs convey no rights beyond fair use unless there is an explicit contract alongside the NFT. Most NFTs don't have that, which means most NFTs convey more or less the same package of rights to a piece of media that everyone else on Earth has.

 

[Abstruse]

HasBro isn't a non-profit, nor a public benefit corporation (PBC), so they have to take the highest financial benefit to individual shareholders as the bar. A combined boycott & purchase offer at a credible offer... HasBro would legally be required to either accept it or put it to the board.

The amount needed, however, would be much easier achieved by creating a PBC which is dedicated to buying up HasBro stock so as to effect changing HasBro to a PBC focused upon the gaming industry.

That's not entirely true. Corporations do not have to take what is the "highest financial benefit", they are just beholden to shareholders who can recall them from the Board of Directors if they believe actions taken will damage the company.

And even if that were true, I'd also like to remind you that Wizards of the Coast is responsible for 72% of the operating profit at Hasbro. And that Magic: The Gathering makes the vast majority of Wizards of the Coast's profit. Magic: The Gathering made many, many, MANY times more money for Hasbro than any other single property they own. If they think they can just up and buy the brand that made the company $547 million of the $763.3 million of the company's profits for 2021, it would have to be an offer that would make the recent video game corporate acquisitions by Sony and Microsoft look paltry in comparison.

 

[Mallus]

I can’t get past the fact crypto uses real non-renewable resources to create artificial scarcity. Who invented this? Victor von Doom?

(Satoshi von Doom?)

 

[AtomicPope]

There's two things that are quite glaring in these arguments against Block Chain and Crypto Currency:
1) Detractors rely on Fear Mongering - Bad for the environment is not a valid argument, especially on the internet. It absolutely reeks of fear mongering.
2) Global Finance Opposes Them - The same global financial institutions and politicians who oppose Crypto Currency also supported subprime mortgages and crashed the economies of several countries. I'm done listening to anything they have to say, or anyone who parrots their talking points. The IMF didn't see any problems with subprime mortgages yet they're terrified of Crypto and want to regulate it.

 

[Jd Smith1]

You guys are likely the old white dudes (not in suits) complaining about those young kids and their rock music of this era.

Not to nit-pick, but it was old white dudes (as you so eloquently put it) who made most of the money off rock & roll.

For every anecdote about old people mocking personal computers or Elvis is a dozen who mocked emu farms, beefalos, and an endless variety of other 'next big thing' plans, and were right.

However, cryptocurreny has one angle going for it that literally no one on this thread has touched on:

It is a power hog (that part has been noted). Much like electric cars, it puts a heavy burden on the power grid. A grid, I might add, which is barely keeping up with demand, and which (in the USA) relies almost exclusively on coal and oil, and will for the foreseeable future.

Which means as a concept, it has powerful friends. Fossil fuel providers, quite possibly the most powerful economic/political bloc in the USA, know that the dream is to put them out of the power generation business. Nuclear power generation could have already done it, being a mature and safe (as practiced in the USA) technology, but bad media and NIMBY effectively stopped it cold decades ago. Solar and wind are not technologically ready to shoulder the load, especially since both are very vulnerable to drastic weather conditions. So anything that increases the demand for electricity extends the lifespan of the fossil fuel power generation. Computers, cell phones, social media, climate control...the demand for electricity is second only to the demand for potable water in urban planner's minds.

 

[Smackpixi]

1) Detractors rely on Fear Mongering

Don’t supporters use fear as well? Fear of missing out?

 

[Malmuria]

OK. And if, in 20 years, it's still here and ubiquitous, then what? There were entire interviews with higher-ups at IBM who said the personal computer was never going to go beyond a toy. There were huge articles about the web claiming it was useless in computer magazines. Don't you even pause for a moment to consider even the slightest possibility you're them?

Criticizing a technology is not the same as dismissing it. Indeed, it’s a sign that people are taking the technology, along with its uses or misuses very seriously. Similarity, just because a technology has and will be around isn’t a counter argument to those criticisms. I’m sure many technologies will be around in the future: social media, drones, nanotechnology, sophisticated robots, AI, biometric surveillance; neither the prevalence nor the longevity of those technologies are counter arguments to the many legitimate criticisms of them.

Case in point, much of the concern around crypto and nfts centers around their carbon usage. This is because climate change, too, will be a thing that is around in 20 years.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I can’t get past the fact crypto uses real non-renewable resources to create artificial scarcity. Who invented this? Victor von Doom?

(Satoshi von Doom?)

You're using a device, power, and infrastructure created with real non-renewable resources for entertainment, and you're surprised?

 

[Abstruse]

I can’t get past the fact crypto uses real non-renewable resources to create artificial scarcity. Who invented this? Victor von Doom?

(Satoshi von Doom?)

"We are now using more energy than the entire country of Switzerland and all the pollution it causes to do nothing and make money!" sounds over the top for an episode of Captain Planet.

 

[kenmarable]

I'm done listening to anything they have to say, or anyone who parrots their talking points. The IMF didn't see any problems with subprime mortgages yet they're terrified of Crypto and want to regulate it.

This is getting off topic, but personally I'm done listening to anyone who spouts inaccurate revisionist history like this.