Pathfinder 1E Paizo no longer publishing Dungeon and Dragon

[Agamon]

There are a FEW people here who think everything is peachy and no one should be at all upset over such an obviously trivial issue.

 

[Mistwell]

Let me draw an analogy:

When fewer trains run down the railroad tracks, I'd say business is off.

For the train business maybe, unless the trains that are running are much longer. But, regardless, fewer trains doesn't mean less transportation, which is the purpose of a train.

When almost no trains run down the railroad tracks, I'd say business is way off.

For the train business.

When no trains run down the railroad tracks, the tracks are rusted, and the rail-right-of-way is covered in brush, I'd say the state of business is truly bad.

I'd say some better form of transportation supplanted it.

When they tear out the railroad tracks and convert the right-of-way into a paved bicycle path, then I would say it's over.

For the train business.

Well, they just tore out the railroad tracks, by cancelling Dragon and Dungeon Magazines. So, in my book, it's over.

That does not follow. Dragon and Dungeon were compilations of interesting information regarding D&D. That interesting information will still be produced and conveyed to essentially the same group of readers. It will just be done by a different means. Sort of how cars and planes took over for trains.

Transport was not killed when trains left, just trains were killed. Dungeon and Dragon were not killed when the paper left, just the paper was killed.

Now, the bicyclists may enjoy the parkway, and commerce may continue on the freeways, and people may point to that and say: something is still happening.
That's true: something is still happening. But it's not trains on railroad tracks.
In the Hobby something will continue to happen. But it won't be Dungeons and Dragons.

D&D was never those two magazines. Heck, Dungeon is still relatively new to the hobby, when compared to the rest of it. MOST players and DMs didn't even read either magazine, given it's circulation when compared to the number of people playing. I'd say your few is a bit skewed. But then...we already knew that buddy.

 

[Mistwell]

I KNEW IT!

When you asked the Paizo rep whether he was a principal in negotiations, or whether he wanted to provide evidence on the record ... I knew there was a lawyer in the house!

After spending 5 years on the university debating circuit, my spider-sense is attuned to law-speak.

Shawn

Hey I spent 5 years on the university debating circuit too! CEDA, NDA, or Parliamentary?

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Actually, didn't Erik or James post something recently about them working out an arrangement with Kyle Hunter to do a Downer compilation?

 

[Nightfall]

Aggy,

Me? Upset. Nah. I past upset on my way to furious and I'm now at seething. I figure by this time tomorrow I'll hit "homicial rage" in about...12 hours. Yes there will be a Downer compilation down the road.


Mist,

What do you expect from Edena, logic?

 

[Scylla]

No, one percent of D&D players.

There's 5 million D&D players (according to Paizo).

Their magazine had 50,000 readers, 28% of which subscribed (again according to Paizo).

That means the magazine was reaching 1% of D&D players.

I don't think it's crazy to think you can do better.

The 2005 Gen Con Indy had an attendance just over 25,000. Half a percent.
Guess they better cancel that too, eh?

Point is, numbers are relative. Saying there are 5 million players (and I love Paizo but I'd like to see their hard data) doesn't mean these are all 3e players or, more importantly, players still shelling out money for WotC's products. I know players & DMs who only play 1e using their old books and I know players & DMs who don't buy from WotC, but they would probably be counted into that 5 million. How many of that 5 million actively buy WotC products? What percentage would be considered successful for a gaming magazine (especially as the two being discussed are probably the most popular ever)? It's all relative, my friend.

 

[Nightfall]

Scylla,

Just like people that post here. Except me, I'm on my way to Crothian's post count!

 

[Vigilance]

You'd really have to compare it to the circulation figures of other magazines of a similar subject matter to be able to judge, I'm thinking.

I suppose. If you wanted to look at Dragon and Dungeon as magazines that somehow sprung from the forehead of Zeus independent of D&D and not as periodicals designed to support D&D.

At 1%, they aren't supporting nearly as much of the hobby as they could.

And they were being well run.

This might lead one to conclude that the format was doing as much as it could and that maybe a different structure would work better.

But that's just me.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Point is, numbers are relative. Saying there are 5 million players (and I love Paizo but I'd like to see their hard data) doesn't mean these are all 3e players or, more importantly, players still shelling out money for WotC's products. I know players & DMs who only play 1e using their old books and I know players & DMs who don't buy from WotC, but they would probably be counted into that 5 million. How many of that 5 million actively buy WotC products? What percentage would be considered successful for a gaming magazine (especially as the two being discussed are probably the popular ever)? It's all relative.

Apparently we Vulcans are not wanted around here, Scylla.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

But that's just me.

It's not just you, no.

But I don't happen to agree and I'm not entirely sure that your viewpoint accurately reflects the reality of the situation. Then again, I'm hardly an expert on the matter myself, so there we go. *shrug*