DRAGON+ Now Available For Ratings

I must admit, I don't personally get some of the reactions to DRAGON+, the mobile app from WotC which launched in April. It's described as "...your official mobile source for all-things Dungeons & Dragons. This free app for iPhone or iPad has everything you want to know about D&D in one easy place. In addition to ongoing up-to-the minute news updates, every second month you’ll enjoy a new issue of Dragon+ showcasing what’s new in Dungeons & Dragons – from backstory and world information to discussions about what’s coming next with the creators and developers of your favorite D&D products." I think it does pretty much exactly what is says it'll do; it's not a content platform, it's one of those "brand news" apps which every company has these days. Perfectly normal. I think it's the name which is causing issues, because - being named after a magazine which published gaming content - people were disappointed that this wasn't that. I'm not personally interested in it, but I don't resent its existence. It's not really designed for folks who are up to date with the latest morsel or tweet from the D&D team.

Anyhow, I know that many people disagree (some pretty strongly) with my take on the apps, so the first two issues are available on iOS and Android now, and both can be commented on and rated in the reviews section here on EN World. Enjoy! Feel free to rate each issue as it comes out, and leave comments.

​

 

[Agamon]

Anyway, as I was saying, in a perfect world, the content would be available in an HTML5 container that would have defined CSS templates for the differing formats. People on a computer could view and print it like a nicely laid out PDF. People on a mobile device could view the content without all the difficulty normally associated with viewing PDFs on small screens. .

Personally, I like the split. The right format for the right content. With digital content, providers aren't limited to "everything between two covers" format that was easier to do with dead tree mags.

No more finding a magazine (or a pdf, or an app) and leafing through trying to find an article to use in the game. Just a folder with UA articles that are easy to find and use. And the app works for what it is, some light reading on the phone during downtime.

 

[Louis Brenton]

I haven't publicly expressed any dislike for Dragon+, but I will say that, in my opinion, it's a 2 or 3 out of 10. I very much agree that I shouldn't have much grounds for complaint since it's a free product. But here's my thinking...

I would GLADLY pay real money to have a real Dragon Magazine today. I LOVED those things back in the day, & I got all kinds of giddy when I heard there was going to be a Dragon+. I was quite prepared to pay money to get content similar to the old Dragon days, but perhaps that ship has sailed.

So, in conclusion, I only like Dragon+ a little, I won't complain about it much since it's free, but I really wish we could have a real magazine again & I'd pay money for it.

 

[Rune]

Ahh... now I see why. The edits were so minor that it barely deserves mention.

The most recent version of the Basic rules merely incorporates errata, it is not meant to be an overhaul.

Hey Wizards -- How about adding the spells from HotDQ/RoT/Elemental Evil player PDFs? How about adding in the monsters too? Seriously, what are you guys doing over there all day?

And why would they? Those are all campaign-specific supplements. Basic D&D is intended to be an uncluttered set of rules that can be used in place of the PH, MM, and DMG.

 

[Quickleaf]

Seems to show that Chris Perkins things that the main point of Dragon magazine was news and previews for D&D, and that Matt Champan thinks "the next level" of "the traditional magazine format" is basically advertising.

I think there is ample room to disagree with both of those.

Haha. Well, I want to be clear that I'm not accusing either of these guys of maliciously misleading us. After all, Chris is probably one of the most dedicated people out there when it comes to D&D. He got his start in the industry thru Dungeon magazine and I remember really enjoying some of his old Dungeon adventures. So there's no way I can imagine Chris Perkins actually believing that Dragon magazine of the past was mainly a news and previews outlet. That just doesn't add up with what I know and admire about him.

From my perspective it's pretty clear there is a media spin about DRAGON+ happening among people higher up the corporate ladder than these fellows.

It'd be much more honest (and I would argue more in their favor) to call a newsstand app a newsstand app, though.

Now, the only reason I can really think of to use the name DRAGON+ is if they do plan to release a Dragon magazine in some format down the road, thus making DRAGON+ the newsstand supplement to Dragon magazine. Though the chances of that seem pretty small given current trends.

 

[vandaexpress]

Except that those people will never download the app. If I'm not well-informed about D&D, I'm not going to know that there's a "Dragon+" app that has anything to do with D&D.

Which means, the ONLY people who are downloading this app are people who already know about these things because they visit the Wizards.com site and hit social media related to D&D topics.

So the target audience is apparently a group of people who will never download the app.

That makes absolutely no sense... which, now that I think about it, is fairly typical of WotC's digital strategy.

This guy gets it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Haha. Well, I want to be clear that I'm not accusing either of these guys of maliciously misleading us. After all, Chris is probably one of the most dedicated people out there when it comes to D&D. He got his start in the industry thru Dungeon magazine and I remember really enjoying some of his old Dungeon adventures. So there's no way I can imagine Chris Perkins actually believing that Dragon magazine of the past was mainly a news and previews outlet. That just doesn't add up with what I know and admire about him.

From my perspective it's pretty clear there is a media spin about DRAGON+ happening among people higher up the corporate ladder than these fellows.

And then you just have a "stupid marketing choice was a stupid marketing choice" problem - they maybe shouldn't have grabbed the DRAGON magazine name if they were not planning on actually honoring that legacy at all.

 

[Torg Smith]

While I am not familiar with the Dragon+ as I don't have an IPhone or Android device, I did like what Dragon originally was. It used to be a RPG magazine back when TSR had it. It did have articles about RPG computer games, not just TSR licensed games. It had lots of content and options for role playing games, not just TSR games. It talked about movies and stated up some characters from them. It was actually a great general role playing games magazine. I have not really seen that in many years.

 

[mxyzplk]

"Come, suckle upon our brand!"

The real problem here, and it's not limited to WotC, is all these companies determining that their "brand" is the thing of value, as opposed to the actual content or goods they produce. This kind of vehicle makes sense once you leave value creation behind as a core concept.

 

[MartyW]

I would GLADLY pay real money to have a real Dragon Magazine today. I LOVED those things back in the day, & I got all kinds of giddy when I heard there was going to be a Dragon+.

I gladly paid money during the 4e version when Dragon and Dungeon were PDFs with lots of really great 4th edition content.

I'm not pining away for a paper magazine, because I understand the cost/profit ratio (though I have purchased some issues of Gygax). But after they discontinued the 4e Dragon and Dungeon PDFs, there was a hint of a promise that it would return in some way.

I would pay for a 5e version of that product.

 

[MartyW]

And why would they? Those are all campaign-specific supplements. Basic D&D is intended to be an uncluttered set of rules that can be used in place of the PH, MM, and DMG.

Because it's the right thing to do for the consumer?

If I'm playing those campaigns with Basic, wouldn't it be easier to house all the monsters together instead of spread across 3 to 4 PDFs? Wouldn't it be better to have all the spells together instead of spread across 3 or 4 PDFs?

Are you really saying that the D&D Basic consumer is better off without a single organized player or DM document?

What about people who own the PHB, but also want all of the spells for the various different campaigns collected into a single work? I've spent my hard money on their books and campaigns. Isn't there some onus on them to give me a single document that collects that information I need to run their modules (for which I paid money) together instead of having me have to flip back and forth through several PDF documents?