D&D 5E Are you currently happy with Dragon+?

[doctorhook]

I voted "No". I haven't read the most recent issue, mainly because the previous ones lost my interest. I probably won't give Dragon another look until someone whose opinion I trust tells me there's something in there worth looking at.

 

[Cody C. Lewis]

The shortest answer I have for why I voted no:

It simply provides little to nothing for me to bring to my table. Whether that be crunch or fluff.

 

[Zaukrie]

Pretty much useless, and imo, an insult to previous editors to name it this. It did drive me to fund a different, good, product.....

 

[I'm A Banana]

I've typically got better ways to spend my time than volunteering to look at ads. Don't get me wrong - these are pretty good ads! Pretty decent advertainment, all around. Like, B+, especially with the free mini-adventure. Just not something that is usually worth my time. If I had to read it before a YouTube video, or in between acts of a sitcom on Hulu or if it was offered in a sidebar for ENWorld or something, I wouldn't object, and would be favorably disposed to the brand.

But in my attention economy, looking at ads isn't typically worth the time devoted to it.

I can't tell if this means my answer to the question is yes or no. I'm ambivalent about Dragon+. It's not worth my time to may much attention to, and so it's not worth my time to hate on much, and if WotC is content with that (I might not be in their target audience!), and the folks that WotC ARE targeting are happy, everything sounds like it's working as intended. If it was more, I might pay it more mind, but then it'd be competing for my attention with other things, and that hurdle might not be worth it for WotC to clear. So, I guess, if all they're shooting for is advertainment, I'm happy with it being that, and happy to ignore it. If they're trying to shoot for something bigger, it's failing, but that failure might be bothering WotC than it is bothering me.

 

[delericho]

Yes, but a successor is not a renewal.

Of course. I don't disagree.

But [MENTION=52905]darjr[/MENTION] asked for a citation on them referring to it as a successor, and I knew I'd seen that somewhere, so chased it up. I wasn't making some grand point about... anything really. Just providing the relevant citation since I'd found it.

 

[aramis erak]

Too much advert, not enough content. Double the content? sure.

 

[Pandaemoni]

It's basically free so I have no complaints about it, but I haven't found it useful. For those running the official WOTC campaigns, it looks like it includes some useful background material. The reason I am so fond of TSR's Dragon magazine, though was its mix of a little mechanical material that DMs might allow (or not) with the more background (some might say "fluff" though I mean that in a non-derogatory way) materials like the Ecology of the Beholder (or the flumph or gnoll or mind flayer, etc) or the justifiably renowned "The Nine Hells, Part 1" [and Part 2].

Seems like it's only the fluff now, and only insofar as they they delve deep into the background of their latest products. That may not be entirely fair, but it has been my perception of the offerings thus far.

 

[darjr]

Don't forget to fill out the survey. There is a chance to win a $50 gift card.

 

[Mistwell]

Pretty much useless, and imo, an insult to previous editors to name it this. It did drive me to fund a different, good, product.....

Why is it useless, given the content in this month's issue?

 

[Zaukrie]

Previous issues. I have not opened this one yet.