Pathfinder 1E Paizo no longer publishing Dungeon and Dragon

[Dannyalcatraz]

I wonder if part of the reason for this is to eliminate a medium for people to learn about competing products, such as Reaper's upcoming non-randomized prepainted plastic miniatures, or other RPG products that compete with WotC.

I seriously doubt that- if that were the case, it would be much easier to simply not review the products or take their advertisments. Other game company house magazines have been known to do that- I recall Pyramid & White Wolf magazines (among others) were repeatedly "our stuff only" mags at various times.

 

[Alzrius]

Here's my email to WotC:

Subject: Cancelling Dungeon and Dragon magazines was a bad idea.

Dear Wizards of the Coast,

I'm writing to inform you that your decision not to renew Paizo's license to publish Dragon and Dungeon magazines was a very poor one. Dragon magazine has been around since before I was born, and it and its sister magazine have been there since I started playing D&D. Losing them has killed an iconic part of the game so many of us love, and there's is a void that cannot be filled by any electronic pay-for-download service, even if you name it Dungeon or Dragon.

What rankles me most about this is that this is so clearly a decision based on money, and not what's best for the game. Paizo's sales of the magazines has been increasing for the last few years, so it cannot be said that this was due to profitability (if anything, it makes you look worse because you seem to be undercutting a rising competitor). Likewise, you had total approval over all of their D&D-brand products, so it cannot be said that it was because they were taking the game in a direction of which you did not approve.

The only explanation left is that you are deliberately creating a void so that you can directly offer a product to fill it. And not only is that soulless in principle, but the manner in which you're going to do so seems ill-fated. Not everyone has internet access so regularly, to say nothing of how unreliable it is; when my hard drive crashes or when the local area network goes down, I don't lose access to my magazines, but I will to your service. And those are just some of the more likely errors. It seems that, after you divested yourself of the magazines five years ago, that this is being done online purely because you have less production costs that way.

As it stands, I see nothing to make me think that your decision is one that will benefit me as a customer, or as a D&D player. Paizo knew this announcement was coming, and made sure to have page after page ready, giving us not only all the information we could possibly need to get through this troubling news, but also previews of a new printed series they'll be introducing to help fill the void. You, on the other hand, announced the cancellation of the magazines as a footnote on your website, with no information about your online initiative. Even if I were inclined to think that this decision of yours was a good one, there's simply nothing to back it up. All I know at this point is that you cancelled something good and are offering a total unknown in exchange, save for the many faults of it being internet-only.

I am disappointed by this decision, and will likely mourn the loss of Dungeon and Dragon for some time to come.

Sincerely,

Shane O'Connor

 

[Ry]

I seriously doubt that- if that were the case, it would be much easier to simply not review the products or take their advertisments. Other game company house magazines have been known to do that- I recall Pyramid & White Wolf magazines (among others) were repeatedly "our stuff only" mags at various times.

Yeah, wizards could have just changed the terms of the lisence if they wanted to do that... but then it would be a much less valuable lisence.

 

[The_Gneech]

And it only took about twenty years for that to happen.

(I get your point, and I agree with it, but maybe not the best example to use. )

Well, fifteen. With lots of fits and starts mixed in. I chose it because it was visible -- and a cycle that I lived through.

-The Gneech

 

[Ghendar]

Because the best way to protest the cancellation of a venue for freelance designers to get work is to refuse to patronize another way for a lot of those very same freelancers to get work.

Blame WotC, not me. This is my protest. Deal with it.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Well, fifteen. With lots of fits and starts mixed in. I chose it because it was visible -- and a cycle that I lived through.

True enough. You could have used the Firefly/Serenity analogy, though- that only took about two to three years- a much more sustainable period.

Even if Wizards' online initiative fails with the magazines, I am sure that Dragon and Dungeon's days aren't completely over as brands.

 

[Kelek72]

I know I am a little late in saying WOW, but WOW.
I feel like I have lost a couple of friends.
There was a great feeling every month anticipating the arrival in the mail of the magazines.
Dragon magazine helped get me into gaming when I was a kid - Issue #111 with the dueling dragons on the cover sucked me in and I have been a loyal customer ever since.

I really enjoyed the magazines more than most of the other game products - and this has been consistent, throughout all editions and publishers. I have boxes and boxes of memories that can never be duplicated by online content.

Online content to me is just casual reading - I don't even have a printer! After a while, my eyes hurt looking at a screen...

Its not going to be the same experience, although I realize its not supposed to be. Some believe online content is better. I guess I'm just not one of them!

 

[DonTadow]

From: John Robey (thegneech@gmail.com)
to: corporateinfo@wizards.com
date: Apr 20, 2007 10:47 AM
subject: Hurt by the Cancellation of Dragon / Dungeon Magazines

I will be sending a paper copy of this letter as well, but I wanted to make sure this was received quickly.

I want to let you know that I am stunned, angry, and hurt that you are planning to discontinue Dragon and Dungeon magazines -- and I feel that this is a very bad move both for Wizards of the Coast, and for the gaming community at large.

D&D is the flagship of tabletop RPGs, and always has been -- and its support magazines are vital to the gaming community. Even in the pre-3e days when I wouldn't play D&D, I would still regularly buy the magazines. Being on magazine racks and in bookstores, Dragon and Dungeon are the face of gaming as a whole that is seen by the general public -- who will not be going to the Wizards website, and most assuredly not be subscribing to the website content. By removing this from the public eye, you make gaming (which is already a niche market) even MORE obscure. How can this possibly grow the hobby -- and with it your business?

I suggest you peruse the WotC, Paizo, and ENWorld message boards if you have not already done so, to see just how personal a connection these magazines have for people. For many, myself included, Dragon magazine in particular was their introduction to D&D and to roleplaying games generally. Even before I bought my first gaming product, I was reading issues of Dragon that I managed to get from my older brother or my friends' older brothers.

A website is a passive communication channel -- it depends on people coming to you. Magazines are active -- they reach out. I won't begin to talk about the profit or lack thereof involved in the magazines, because I don't have the numbers. I have read that Erik Mona says the magazines were in the black, and that should be more than enough. Because the magazines are not a revenue stream, they are a marketing channel! People are PAYING YOU TO GIVE THEM YOUR ADVERTISEMENT, for crying out loud. By all rights, the magazines should be considered an expense, and yet they're making a profit. You would throw that away? I'm flabbergasted!

Even if I were inclined to pay for exclusive online content (which I emphatically am NOT), I would not take part in this vague "electronic initiative" that Dragon and Dungeon are being killed to make room for. My remaining subscription credit will instead go to Paizo's "Pathfinder" series, which is the closest thing I see to a true successor to Dragon and Dungeon. If and when Dragon and Dungeon return, you'll get my business again -- but not before.

On top of everything else, Dragon and Dungeon have a history that should be honored, not simply thrown away on the whim of an "electronic publishing" fad. I hope it doesn't fall on deaf ears when I say that owning the rights to "Dungeons and Dragons" is not merely "managing a brand" -- but that it makes you heirs to a legacy. Long-term, "hard core" gamers -- your best, highest-paying customers -- have a love for the game and its traditions, and to simply decide one day that those traditions are old hat is a slap in the face.

Please reverse this ill-advised course of action as soon as possible. I can easily believe that you did not realize just how negative a reaction this would get, nor how personally the gaming community might take it. But as I have said elsewhere, this feels like you've killed an old friend of mine.

Thank you for your time.

-John "The Gneech" Robey

Yeah, I can't wait for this whole internet fad to blow over, its taking time away from my reading at night.

Seriously, everything evolves. I've been in magazine and newspaper publishing for 12 years. Man ypeople in those industries believe that most newspapers won't be around in 15 years and only a few magazines will remain. The average magazine has a shelf life of 10 to 20 years. You just can't keep something around that's losing you money.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

I wonder if part of the reason for this is to eliminate a medium for people to learn about competing products, such as Reaper's upcoming non-randomized prepainted plastic miniatures, or other RPG products that compete with WotC.

I'll say this, though, as long as people at Paizo who create gaming products I love (Erik, James, etc.), I'll continue to support them through my purchases.

If it is, then they're schizophrenic. You can't base your future around on-line distribution on the one hand and on the other be totally ignorant of how easy information flows on the Internet. I don't think they can seriously expect that gamers will go to their site to the exclusion of all other gaming sites.

And now that I think of it, didn't their own research show a couple years back that an overwhelming majority of gamers had no regular presence on the internet (as it pertains to the hobby, anyway)? How do you go from that to thinking all of them will not only jump online but pay for the privilege as well?

 

[Schmoe]

I think the draw of incorporating official, post SRD D&D content is greater than the draw of incorporating 3rd party material. Paizo didn't put "100% Official D&D Content" on the covers because they thought it looked pretty, you know.

Yeah, but they didn't really have a choice, either. I'd bet that there were many times Paizo wanted to include some 3rd party-related material, but couldn't, because of the license. At any rate, right now it's moot whether "100% official" is greater than "Primary 3rd-party source", because the latter is all that's available. The relevant question is whether "Primary 3rd-party source" improves the 3rd party market as it is now.