Another Dragon #300 thread - kill the tie-ins

[Johnny Wilson]

Just two quick notes:

1) Crazy Mage is correct. I did post somewhere on En World that #300 would not have the see-through spell template. The material we ordered just didn't work the way we thought it would. We're doing a template without the see-through and trying to work a special deal to do a higher quality see-through in the future. I mentioned this in a post where I also said that #300 would not be thicker in the sense of #200. Of course, we deconstructed that page count earlier in this thread.

2) OGL is a very tricky issue for us. You may have noticed that the copyright notice in the masthead of Dragon and Dungeon both claim all rights for Wizards of the Coast. This is because we publish the magazines under license and, like our license with Lucasfilm, Ltd. for Star Wars Insider, the licensor owns all rights in order to protect their intellectual property. As for not seeing the cool stuff in products, WotC R&D is quite good at cherry-picking the good stuff for use in future products. While WotC doesn't want to open the door for every d20 publisher to re-use Dragon content, our former co-workers and continued friends and colleagues are smart enough to be thinking of future products, all the time.

Johnny L. Wilson
President, Paizo Publishing, LLC and General Industry Busybody

 

[RobNJ]

1) Cut out the heavy themed issues.

Rebuttal: Don't cut out the heavy themed issues. I like that each issue has its own theme, it makes it easier to find the content when a few months have gone past and there's enough detail there that I can come up with a whole campaign setting on the fly if I need to. Even when I'm not interested in the theme (should you, say, ever do an underwater themed issue) there're still things I'm able to adept. So please, for the love of god, don't do away with themes.

I can kinda be lenient about 300 since it

"I can be lenient" ?!?!?!?! How magnanemous of you, milud.

Monte’s article on “how vile is your game” was pretty useless.

Why don't you practice how to use your words properly? It wasn't useless. You didn't like it. Maybe you couldn't find a use for it. But it wasn't useless. I thought it was excellent, and it was a good reminder of the kinds of things to take into account when dealing with things that might not be appropriate for all audiences.

Fact is, that the more narrow the theme, the less useful it is to the majority of readers.

As I've said before, if you're going to claim facts, you'd better have data to back it up. The only fact is that you don't like themed issues and you have internet friends who don't like them either. It is not therefore a fact that most people agree with your opinion on anything.

Try some constructive criticism.

11) No more political BS from Johnny Wilson. I could care less what his feelings about Criminals not being able to play D&D are. One article was way too much.

I appreciate the context-for-the-larger-world that articles like this provide.

 

[The Sigil]

Lemme break it down for you, Mr. Wilson. There are people on these boards who hate anything and everything done by "The Powers That Be". No matter who is deemed to be in a power position, they will be hated for being in that position. There need be no substantive complaint, because people will invent statistics that state that theirs is a majority opinion.

I will be the first to admit that "messageboards" are not a perfectly accurate sampling of opinion. However, one needs only read the messageboards here to get the message that most people that care enough to talk about Dragon DO in fact have some issues with it. You are dismissing that statistic to state that yours is the majority opinion. How are you any different?

To be honest, your "ignore the people who are complaining" posts - and accompanying rants and attacks on the people who raise issues - sound somewhat like "fanboy" syndrome. If that is not your intention (and I don't think it is, based on your comments below), be aware that it does come across that way (in the same way I come across to you as having a fanatical hatred of WotC - I don't, but perhaps my choice of words doesn't reflect it).

I get so sick and tired of reading threads and posts by people who gather together to talk about a game/TV show/comic book/what have you and then spend all of their time complaining about how it sucks, or how it used to be good.

Perhaps it is due to the fact that they feel they have legitimate gripes. Perhaps they actually do have legitimate gripes. If you don't want to hear about them, you do not have to read them. But to dismiss them out of hand just because you don't agree with them doesn't really attack the problem - that there are some people out there whose needs are not being met - and if you sift through the complaints, you just might find out how to meet their needs.

The fact is that I don't find everything in your magazine useful, nor is everything to my taste, but I'm enough of an adult to realize that the publishers of a magazine or a book can't put on their telepathy hats, determine exactly what I want, then give it to me. And even if you could do that, most of the people who put up these whiney rant threads wouldn't be satisified.

Agree with you there. I don't find everything in Dragon useful either - the problem for me is that I am finding less and less useful stuff in every issue - in fact, I think I have found zero useful material in about the last 4-5 months. I am willing to overlook an issue or two ("hey, I just wasn't the target audience") but when it becomes a consistent problem, my needs are not being met. I don't expect everything in every issue to be stuff I want. I *do* expect to find something in every issue that is what I want. And as mentioned, that hasn't happened for a while now, and that is disturbing to me.

You do good product. Ignore these people.

Hmm.... "you do good product." Looks like a statement of fact to me... can you back it up? That's your opinion, right? My opinion is, "you have made changes to your product. Because of those changes, my needs are being met on a less consistent basis, and worse, my needs are being met less consistently the more changes you make. If you wish to continue having my support in the form of subscribership, you need to (a) undo some of the changes or (b) make other changes to give me stuff I need."

(as a side note, the fact that you can produce reasonably well-balanced rulessets each month is really impressive)

On this, I whole-heartedly agree. See, we don't disagree about EVERYTHING!

--The Sigil

 

[RobNJ]

I will be the first to admit that "messageboards" are not a perfectly accurate sampling of opinion.

They're not even a slightly accurate sampling of opinion. This board is good for getting ideas or for checking whether things balance or for just shooting the (I don't know how censorious these boards are so I'll just say) crap. They are not at all a good sample of gamer opinion or behavior because the sample is so infinitessimally small.

However, one needs only read the messageboards here to get the message that most people that care enough to talk about Dragon DO in fact have some issues with it. You are dismissing that statistic to state that yours is the majority opinion. How are you any different?

Pardon me, but please show me where I stated that mine is a majority opinion? If I did that, I was wrong, but I don't believe I did.

The only thing possibly arguing that is that Paizo is publishing a magazine based in part on their own examinations of what their readers want. That's going to be more reliable than angry cranks on a message board.

To be honest, your "ignore the people who are complaining" posts - and accompanying rants and attacks on the people who raise issues - sound somewhat like "fanboy" syndrome.

I don't believe I've done much with people who didn't claim to be speaking for me. What pisses me off is when people say, "Gamers don't like this," or, "We want more of that." And when people are unreasonable and eager to see faults were there are none. Expressing an opinion, providing constructive criticism, these are useful things. I react to stuff like: "This is a fact, this is what everyone wants, and I know, so you'd better do it, and by the way you stink and you dress funny," which is the content of a lot of the criticism to be found here.

I also get irritable about people who are like, "If I don't like it it shouldn't be in the magazine." Bullcrap. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean there aren't others who do. I don't want: "Rob: The Gaming Magazine for Rob." I am fine with Dragon sometimes including things that I don't necessarily like, because I'm clued in to reality enough to know that the world isn't catered to my personal idosynchracies.

Perhaps it is due to the fact that they feel they have legitimate gripes.

Legitimate gripes, constructive criticism, etc., presented in a reasonable and polite way are perfectly fine. But, "WotC VIOLATES!!!!!!! the OGL," isn't.

I would have said, "Hey, it seems like WotC made a mistake in the OGL for MMII. Kinda funny, given how they're having to deal with people routinely screwing these up." Nowhere near as inflammatory.

There are plenty of posts on this thread that fit that spirit. They provide reasoned criticism and don't appear to come out of a, "hate the overdog," thing.

Hmm.... "you do good product." Looks like a statement of fact to me... can you back it up? That's your opinion, right?

Correction, I didn't say, "Everyone thinks you do a great job." Mine is a clear statement of opinion, I'm not claiming to speak for anyone.

 

[Default Name Player]

Sigil - Personally, it's hard to see from your POV because it's only been negative - and mainly negative - so far. And nope, the problem is not because it's a negative view, but because the view is overly skewed in one direction. Pointedly, is there anything about Dragon that you DO like to give and idea of where they might be moving in the right direction in your eyes? Specific articles on what they've "done right"? In your Dragon thread, you made mention of the way Dragon use to be, but to be honest that taints too much of nostaglia.

I'd be more inclined to listen to someone with a balanced view.

Second, what kind of campaign are you running and what information are you looking for for? Specifically? I'm currently "on hiatus" from DMing, but I always encounter ideas in movies, TV shows, non-RPG gaming mags, etc. I don't play Greyhawk, but even the Greyhawk section offers potential ideas and information. IMO, I have no idea how one can't garner from any source, no less a magazine about D&D. Heck, the monthly Ed Greenwood article: just take out any FR references and you have a potential location right there. Even Silicon Sorcery can give ideas if you look for them.

Third, Dragon is currently, I guess, "testing" having generic themes in issues, which sounds like what you're looking for. The first was the Knight/Paladin issue, Dragon #299. What is your opinion on that issue, what it covered, and is that the right direction they're heading in since it's doing what you specifically was looking for? (generic gaming info) Issue #301 is going to cover swashbucklers in a generic format. Perhaps look at those two issues and give commentary on those two, which seems to represent where Dragon in thinking about heading to. Criticizing #300 would probably be pointless since it's both an anniversary issue, "Halloween" issue and product tie-in issue.

Fourth, ever consider that you've "outgrown" the magazine format, and that sourcebooks/web info is the only way to go for you? Maybe you want more in-depth information that the magazine format can't really provide?

Just some thoughts.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Ill agree with Sigil here, at least about the way Rob conveys his opinions. No offense intended Rob, but you sound like a sycophantic fanboy outraged that someone else would dare question the legitimacy of your opinion. I like Dragon and have nothing bad to say about it, but I must say that I don't think that stating your case in the way that you have been is conducive to a constructive conversation about the topic, it seems more like off-putting banter. I actually somewhat agree with the content of your original opinion, just not the way in which it was stated.

 

[warcabbit]

I entirely agree, strong themes really glue the magazine together, as well as make it easier to find things later.

What themes are, ah, mandated, though? Yearly, I can think of three we always have.

April is Humor. October is always Undead and Spooks. And the anniversary issue always has a Dragon in it.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Lemme break it down for you, Mr. Wilson. There are people on these boards who hate anything and everything done by "The Powers That Be".

I agree there are people like this- too many people that have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to any corporation.

However- there are others, like myself, who have legitimate concerns about Dragon magazine.

I do not care for the "edgy" trend of the magazine, but I will note bore everyone with that argument again.

My decision regarding Dragon was made today after I read Johnny L. Wilson's letter at the Gaming Report:

http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=5446&mode=thread&order=0

I gathered two conclusions from that letter:
1) It seems the trend is noted as desired by their largest market share.

2) There is either:

a) a belief that putting "How Far Will You Go? Vile Content - Graphic Violence" next to the Mature Audiance box on the cover as well as the "Mature Audiance Advisory - Vile Content Inside" on the sealed section (with a splattering of blood) is a competent warning attempt to protect young readers.. instead of an enticement for their attention.

b) a belief I am dumb enough to accept that it is a warning instead of an obvious marketing gimmick.

I will give them the benefit of the doubt and go with choice a.

In the end, I will not be complaining about Dragon anymore. I plan to cancel my subscription as of this issue.

I just hope this trend and attitude does not extend itself to the WOTC rpg books.

FD

 

[JeffB]

MY MY seems like someone pissed in RobNJ's wheaties today.


You are B&M'ing about people B&Ming...how funny.

And I coudl care less about what RobNJ thinks or his "rebuttal"

Everyone ignore him. His opinion differs from mine.

BTW, the article WAS useless to me.

 

[RobNJ]

b) a belief I am dumb enough to accept that it is a warning instead of an obvious marketing gimmick.

I don't see how this is possible, given that someone from Dragon publicly copped to its being a marketing gimmick right here, I believe.