A New DRAGON+?

You got a message from Dragon+? Via email?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Are you sure? I've been disagreeing with you a lot and I was saying that. In fact, I was saying it way before anyone else.

Wait. Is this a hipster competition?

I think I'm way too old to be a hipster. I can't enjoy things from 30 years ago now ironically, when I enjoyed them unironically when they first came out.

 

[vandaexpress]

What bugs me is that the articles that are there are well-written. They're just on topics that I can't imagine anybody who downloaded Dragon+ is actually interested in reading. I think Halfling Rogue is correct in that it's the way that they're appropriating the Dragon legacy, which brings certain expectations, and completely changed it, that's annoying some people.

What's annoying to me, as a marketing professional, is how incompetent they are at executing some aspects of their marketing plan. I understand that it's hard and challenging, that's why professional marketers exist, it requires a specific skillset to be good. There is a right and a wrong way to do content marketing and it breaks my little heart to see them doing it like this. There are so many things they could do with minimal effort to make it worth reading - like consolidating all of the tweets from the devs (like sage advice) and throwing it into its own little section at the back. Or having a monthly NPC or Monster contest. Or if you really want to make people happy, bring back the Chris Perkins column (I get that he's busy, but I loved those things).

I mean, when the content marketing piece you're releasing easily gets shown up by personal blogs of fans on the internet, your content marketing strategy sucks.

It's free. I didn't ask for it. I get it. I was just so excited when Dragon+ was first announced because I thought it had the potential to be a major win in WotC's favor, and I guess the expectations vs reality has created a bit more disappointment than I expected.

 

[DEFCON 1]

But I mean, I heard them just like everyone else, so I'm not really just now catching on as much as I am just now understanding what they meant. We knew they wanted D&D to be more than just the tabletop, but what I think some of us didn't expect is that they way that they have decided to do it is to downplay the tabletop. They gave us the heads up that the tabletop would be but one facet of D&D, but they didn't tell us that it would no longer be the central facet.

I think most of us expected their strategy to look like this: There is a bus called D&D and the tabletop game is the bus driver with video games/board games/books/apps/etc along for the ride. The passengers go wherever the tabletop turns.

But what I think their strategy really looks like now that we've had a few doses is this: There is a bus called D&D. Tabletop turned the key and pushed the gas, but now all the passengers are driving the bus at the same time.

Yup. People want to believe what they want to believe. Regardless of what WotC flat-out tells us what they're doing.

People insist that 5E can't succeed without X number of books being released because businesses need to sell books to stay in business. Despite WotC's insistence that they can and will produce Y number of books for now and be fine. And when they do in fact release Y number of books, people use that as "proof" that 5E has failed because they cannot believe anyone who doesn't sell X can stay in business.

If that's really what they want to believe, more power to them. But I'll be over here having fun actually playing the game. Heh.

 

[vandaexpress]

But I mean, I heard them just like everyone else, so I'm not really just now catching on as much as I am just now understanding what they meant. We knew they wanted D&D to be more than just the tabletop, but what I think some of us didn't expect is that the way that they have decided to do it is to downplay the tabletop. They gave us the heads up that the tabletop would be but one facet of D&D, but they didn't tell us that it would no longer be the central facet.

I think most of us expected their strategy to look like this: There is a bus called D&D and the tabletop game is the bus driver with video games/board games/books/apps/etc along for the ride. The passengers go wherever the tabletop turns.

But what I think their strategy really looks like now that we've had a few doses is this: There is a bus called D&D. Tabletop turned the key and pushed the gas, but now all the passengers are driving the bus at the same time.

Dude. This. 100% this. And on paper it makes sense. In fact, I was all aboard with the strategy when I first heard about it for the simple reason that as a business, publishing paper books, especially in the RPG niche, is a very low margin operation. The ROI on things like a well-done video game are thick and juicy and the fastest way to tally up phat profits under the D&D brand (just look at the ROI on big budget games, or even the Witcher III which had a 15 million dollar budget and I've been reading estimates that they've brought in probably eight or nine times that amount in profits within a few weeks). So... I mean I get what they're going for.

I just wish I had a way to support some sort of super-high margin TTRPG product since that's my gig.

All I know is that SCL better damn well be the second coming of Baldur's Gate to live up to the hype they're pushing across all their channels.

 

[vandaexpress]

Oh look. There's a link in here. To email the editor.

By god, people. I think I might just email the editor. I feel like a goddamn activist. I am CHANGING THE WORLD. /s

 

[Remathilis]

Here's the problem...

*Letter from the Editor - Interesting fluff on the cover, but nothing of interest.
*Ad for Spellstorm - The link to a sample chapter is good, but its and ad.
*Where It All Started: D&D Videogames - Best article they had, but barely better than I can find online on any number of gaming sites. There are some omissions as well (notice Ruins of Myth Drannor or Temple of Elemental Evil got no mentions?) but generally cool.
*Exploring Sword Coast Legends - Overly long ad for game. Neat read, nothing we didn't know if you've followed prodcution.
*Ad for Sword Coast Legends - Uh, I thought the article did that already...
*Neverwinter: Strongholds - I don't have much interest in Neverwinter, but I'm sure its kinda cool.
*Ad for Neverwinter MMO - Uh, I thought the article did that already...
*Video & Audio Highlights - Basically, a link to their podcast and YouTube channel. Barely offensive, but not real conent.
*The Winter King, a short story set in Icewind Dale - Didn't read it yet, but I don't mind short fiction.
*Ad for Icewind Dale enhanced edition - Silly.
*Fantasy Grounds - Again, since the FG thing was new and they want to push it, I don't mind the background.
*Interview with Ed Greenwood - Interesting, but barely any news to it. Fluff piece.
*Community: Dice Rolling Rituals - ... Really. This is what we're getting for TT coverage? A bunch of ripped quotes and anecdotes? Alone, this wouldn't be offensive, but this is the only TT coverage we got. Blech!
*Tavern Tales: D&D Adventurers League News - This article gave me more info on TT than anything so far. There is some RoD info hidden in there, and AL players might enjoy it. Again, barely TT coverage.
*Ad for shirts and beholder dice bag - Groan.
*Gauntlet Gophers - I don't mind a comic, its not Nodwick, KotDT or What's New with Phil and Dixie, but inoffensive.
*Ad for Temple of Elemental Evil game - Eyeroll
*Next Issue ...

There is the problem. Its not that its trying to balance electronic and table top gaming, its that the whole thing barely touches table top. Seriously, InQuest in the 90's ran more D&D TT coverage than this did! Nothing in it was *bad*, but it felt incomplete.

Seriously, imagine if they had taken the storm sorcerer from UA, polished it up, took some borrowed 4e artwork and put that in Dragon+? BOOM! Instant usable content! Hell, imagine if the UA 4 class modification guidelines were there? Or the 5e Modern articles (btw, what happened to part 2?) How about a few magic items to use in Elemental Evil? A preview of SCL by giving us an item coming from that game? Tie into the retrospective and give us Minsc and Boo's stats or some BG item or spell? Why not an article discussing the history of Psionics? Or an article discussing Ravenloft or Dragonlance or Eberron? (You want a fluff piece that will guide sales WotC? Write an overview of [Setting] and then put an ad for the PDF on DnDClassics after it). How about that convesion guide? No?

Its June, and the only polished release we've seen post DMG is PotA and EEPG. Aside from some Playtest-level UAs and the errata, we've had NOTHING for the TT side. If that's not the definition of Legacy Support, I don't know what is.

I sure hope SCL is amazing, but apparently WotC bet the farm on it...

 

[Agamon]

Maybe the bad idea was calling this Dragon. People expect a certain thing associated with that name.

This is a mobile app that can take the place of scrolling through social media when one is standing around with nothing to do. It's not meant to be substantial content. It's not meant to be used during a game. It's something you can look at while waiting at the doctor's office or riding public transit.

Nothing wrong with that not being one's cup of tea, but I doubt the content will change much. UA is for gaming content, D+ is for gaming-related articles.

 

[darjr]

Where are all the people who were sayng the UE articles gave them all the extra content they need? They should be celebrating how designers avoided another way to bloat 5e.

Note for anyone else reading this. My issues with Dragon+ are not an argument in favor of more bloat. Not even a little.

 

[halfling rogue]

Yup. People want to believe what they want to believe. Regardless of what WotC flat-out tells us what they're doing.

People insist that 5E can't succeed without X number of books being released because businesses need to sell books to stay in business. Despite WotC's insistence that they can and will produce Y number of books for now and be fine. And when they do in fact release Y number of books, people use that as "proof" that 5E has failed because they cannot believe anyone who doesn't sell X can stay in business.

If that's really what they want to believe, more power to them. But I'll be over here having fun actually playing the game. Heh.

I think it's more than just people believing what they want to believe. This is a product with a deep history. Since before I was born D&D=tabletop game. So you really can't fault folks for thinking that would still be the case, even if they desired to add some more channels and facets to capitalize on their IP. Again, they told us what they were doing, but that didn't raise any flags because we could easily see how it could be done without dethroning the tabletop game.

I wasn't referring to success or failure in financial terms. I was aiming at their marketing strategy. I think it is a failure to let everything drive the bus and call it D&D. To be sure, I don't think 5e has failed. I think 5e is a roaring success, which is why this is becoming an apparent marketing failure. Why release something as awesome as the 5e rules/books and then not let it take the wheel? Unless all of the products can successfully drive the bus at the same time, something will give.

Now of course we're only talking about something that is relatively in it's infancy still. So we're not really talking about success or failure in the long term, but more along the lines of starting out of the gate. The tabletop game shot out like lightning. But everything after has wobbled. We're not sure if it's supposed to wobble yet so we're looking real close to see if it's a stumble or just a new technique before they blow our minds. So far it appears to be a stumble. Their push for multiplatform and their efforts to tell us that "D&D is not just tabletop" make it seem like they are holding the smart kid back in the class. That is to say, in an effort to make everything D&D, the good stuff suffers while the stuff not quite up to par is praised as just as good. And that comes off to fans/consumers in a negative way. I think Dragon+ is just a byproduct of that mentality.

They have a fanbase clamoring for stuff related to the tabletop because I'm here to tell ya, the tabletop is freakin awesome and is drawing so many folks new and old alike. So that's where the fan love is. And when WotC downplays the good thing they made, the same thing we all love, in order to tell us about something that they call D&D, that most of us don't yet equate to D&D, then yeah, when Dragon+ comes out, they pulled the rug from under us, and we shouldn't be accused of standing on it.

 

[Kramodlog]

Note for anyone else reading this. My issues with Dragon+ are not an argument in favor of more bloat. Not even a little.

No one is in favor of bloat, but it was the stawman of choice to argue against someone who wanted more RPG content*.

But now I think we might have reach a tipping point. Those who took WotC's side on the question of content are starting to show disastifaction. As some people have said in this thread, I think they are now realizing that the RPG is ancillary to the video games.

It is great for those who play video games, and I have no problem with WotC making lots of money with it, it is just that like many people it is the PnP RPG that interest me.


*Because wanting content doesn't automatically mean a desire for bloat or lead to bloat.