Is Dragon Magazine even *Relevant* anymore?
- Thread starter Steel_Wind
- Start date
Reynard
aka Ian Eller
I have a question, sort of off topic but one i constantly wonder about and some of the responses in this thread brought it back to mind:
At what point can someone who dropped the magazine (in this case; it extends to comics, TV shows and even breakfast cereal) continue to complain about it? How long do you get to use your old opinion as a basis for commenting on a current state? A year? Two? Ten? Seriously, if someone told me they thought superman was a stupid comicbook because of that electrical power thing, I would probably laugh myself stupid. How long ago was that now? But it happens all the time.
If someone says that they loved old school Dragon, but they dropped it when it went 2e, do they matter at all? Is their opinion even valid? What about someone who dropped it when 3e came out? How much has the magazine changed since then? Or even someone who dropped it with issue #321, just prior to the 're-launch'?
Maybe I am being naive and I should realize that people that complain on message boards aren't necessarily the best examples by which to judge a population, but I can't help it. These kinds of self indulgent, self centered opinions based upon a near complete lack of information just astound me. Not that I am telling anyone to run out and buy a copy of Dragon before spewing vitriol all over your keyboard and onto my screen. Rather, I'd prefer you kept your money and saved me the heartburn of having to wade through your bile to get to an informed opinion, even if it is one that I don't happen to agree with.
/rant
At what point can someone who dropped the magazine (in this case; it extends to comics, TV shows and even breakfast cereal) continue to complain about it? How long do you get to use your old opinion as a basis for commenting on a current state? A year? Two? Ten? Seriously, if someone told me they thought superman was a stupid comicbook because of that electrical power thing, I would probably laugh myself stupid. How long ago was that now? But it happens all the time.
If someone says that they loved old school Dragon, but they dropped it when it went 2e, do they matter at all? Is their opinion even valid? What about someone who dropped it when 3e came out? How much has the magazine changed since then? Or even someone who dropped it with issue #321, just prior to the 're-launch'?
Maybe I am being naive and I should realize that people that complain on message boards aren't necessarily the best examples by which to judge a population, but I can't help it. These kinds of self indulgent, self centered opinions based upon a near complete lack of information just astound me. Not that I am telling anyone to run out and buy a copy of Dragon before spewing vitriol all over your keyboard and onto my screen. Rather, I'd prefer you kept your money and saved me the heartburn of having to wade through your bile to get to an informed opinion, even if it is one that I don't happen to agree with.
/rant
Crothian
First Post
Reynard said:
As long as the person wants. I can still argue that cars are terrible becasue they only go 24 mph and scare the horses.
Now we are getting somwhere. A valid argument is different. So, if the reasons behind the complaint is obsolete the arguemnt is obsolete.
You are not wrong. The internet allows people to complain with no real fear of reprocusions. This is nothing new and ever now an then someone comes up with this rant and we talk about it, but it doesn't actually change anything.
Steel_Wind
Legend
I think that was a little uncalled for. I dropped buying Dragon on any sort of regular basis at all when it swtiched to exclusively 2E as that was a game I simply didn't play and had no interest in.
Seeing as about 40% of 1st edition players were similarly disposed, I was not alone in that preference.
But the point is, I came back to D&D with 3E and tried to come back to Dragon as well. I have several recent copies here. 326 through 328 would be the latest ones. I have a dozen others and I pick it up and browse on the stand monthly to see if there is some reason to buy it - but it's just not doing it for me.
From a wide range of posters on this thread, I would not appear to be alone in that view.
The suggestion I was complaining about Dragon solely from a back-in-the-day perspective is wholly inaccurate. I was, however, analyzing the change in the business and the pervasiveness of crunch in the present marketplace on a comparitive basis to the early 80's to illustrate a point.
Erik agreed with that assessment, but you seem to think it was a poor or invalid analysis? Interesting.
In any event, Erik has given us his answer. As other posters have noted here - there is a reasonable likelihood that no matter what changes Dragon makes it is not ever going to be again something which will necessarily be a periodical aimed at *me* and people like *me*.
From the response given in this thread, there are more than a few people similarly situated on ENWorld.
It seems to me that if you are going to make changes to a periodical, you do so for one of two principle business reasons:
1 - you are trying to attract new regular readers to your publication; or,
2 - you are trying to persuade existing readers to continue purchasing it as they might otherwise stop doing so (reduce "churn").
There really are no other business reasons for making changes in a product of this kind.
Seeing as part of the reason one makes changes it to persuade people who don't regularly buy the product to do so... then yes, I would think that as a matter of commercial sense, you at least listen to what such a person might have to say.
To do otherwise is to confuse me with somebody whose money Paizo already has (that would be *you*).
To listen only to current readers generally means you will a harder time finding new ones. Preaching to the choir is not the best way to expand your congregation.
If the logic of that simple proposition escapes you, I fear there is little I can say which will be of any greater assistance.
Seeing as about 40% of 1st edition players were similarly disposed, I was not alone in that preference.
But the point is, I came back to D&D with 3E and tried to come back to Dragon as well. I have several recent copies here. 326 through 328 would be the latest ones. I have a dozen others and I pick it up and browse on the stand monthly to see if there is some reason to buy it - but it's just not doing it for me.
From a wide range of posters on this thread, I would not appear to be alone in that view.
The suggestion I was complaining about Dragon solely from a back-in-the-day perspective is wholly inaccurate. I was, however, analyzing the change in the business and the pervasiveness of crunch in the present marketplace on a comparitive basis to the early 80's to illustrate a point.
Erik agreed with that assessment, but you seem to think it was a poor or invalid analysis? Interesting.
In any event, Erik has given us his answer. As other posters have noted here - there is a reasonable likelihood that no matter what changes Dragon makes it is not ever going to be again something which will necessarily be a periodical aimed at *me* and people like *me*.
From the response given in this thread, there are more than a few people similarly situated on ENWorld.
It seems to me that if you are going to make changes to a periodical, you do so for one of two principle business reasons:
1 - you are trying to attract new regular readers to your publication; or,
2 - you are trying to persuade existing readers to continue purchasing it as they might otherwise stop doing so (reduce "churn").
There really are no other business reasons for making changes in a product of this kind.
Seeing as part of the reason one makes changes it to persuade people who don't regularly buy the product to do so... then yes, I would think that as a matter of commercial sense, you at least listen to what such a person might have to say.
To do otherwise is to confuse me with somebody whose money Paizo already has (that would be *you*).
To listen only to current readers generally means you will a harder time finding new ones. Preaching to the choir is not the best way to expand your congregation.
If the logic of that simple proposition escapes you, I fear there is little I can say which will be of any greater assistance.
I hope you feel like I've listened to your point of view, Steel_Wind. Just because I don't agree with everything you say and don't agree to immediately change the magazine to suit the personal taste of you and people like you doesn't mean that it hasn't been an interesting conversation that informs my thinking on the magazine.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
Steel_Wind
Legend
Of course you listened. Can't ask for more than that. 
/me bows
And I did as well. Perhaps the product will evolve into somthing I will enjoy. I shall keep an open mind.
/me bows
And I did as well. Perhaps the product will evolve into somthing I will enjoy. I shall keep an open mind.
Ranger REG
Explorer
If you're referring to that one Dragon Annual, then yeah, that one kinda sneaked up on us. Previous Annuals had you -- or rather TSR/WotC's Periodical Department at the time -- supporting the company's in-house products, D&D & non-D&D.Erik Mona said:
Won't know until you gamble. I long for a standalone Poly "definitive d20" magazine, to support WotC's RPG products other than D&D, like d20 Modern and Star Wars RPGs.Erik Mona said:
Last edited:
Darrin Drader
Explorer
Ranger REG said:
As do I, and I think that a magazine along these lines could be a success if it were done correctly. If it were kept small scale and in black and white, it might just stand a chance at surival. I doubt it would at all profitable if Paizo were to produce it with the same production values as Dragon magazine. In fact, this sort of a magazine might be best in the hands of a smaller publisher working under a WotC granted license (if that's even possible under the current licensing arrangements with Paizo).
Raven Crowking
First Post
Erik Mona said:
Hey Erik,
Just so you know where I am coming from, I do purchase both Dragon and Dungeon on a regular basis, Dragon far more often than Dungeon. By moving the DM materials to Dungeon, you've gotten me to purchase more Dungeons. I appreciate the Dungeon articles that gave some examples of wilderness descriptions, encounters at the gate, alternates to taverns for seeding adventure hooks, and bridges. I care less for the NPC bits that start with long stat blocks. I might be willing to entertain the stat blocks after being told about the NPC, though...not unlike a dungeon room is described before stat blocks appear.
What I am not suggesting is shifting focus away from D&D or the current edition. What I am suggesting is that the current edition is rather rules-heavy already, and needs more material to help make use of the rules/create game flavor than it needs a new prestige class per issue. The cool thing about these sorts of articles is that they contain, as a matter of course, general information that is usable in a wide variety of game systems even if the article itself focuses on 3.5.
A good recent example is The Petit Tarrasque, which I enjoyed. An earlier issue had an article on setting up a campaign like a television series. While I don't intend on doing so for my own campaign, it made interesting reading. It made me think. That is what I want.
RC
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Erik Mona said:
I'm a little disappionted. He forgot...
Adventures Unlimited: 3-4 adventurers per magazine for different game systems.
Australlian Realms: Good overall fantasy mag.
Arcane: Good overall RPG magazine.
Pyramid (Print Version, online still going)
On the other hand, it's not really fair to list White Wolf and Inphobia since Inphobia is/was White Wolf.
Similar Threads
