What do I want? An apology.

[Thornir Alekeg]

I have found out about one of the first planned releases as part of the DI. It is a new monster they are working on. It is only partly finished, but what I was able to discover is posted below:

Apologizer

Size/Type: Medium Outsider
Hit Dice: 5d8+12
Initiative: -20
Speed: 30 ft.
Armor Class: 42 (Touch AC: 40)
Base Attack/Grapple: +10/+12
Attack: Kick +10 (1d2 (self only))
Special Attacks: Hug, Disarm
Special Qualities: Immune to flame

Apologizers are created from the empty void left whenever a Dragon is slain. These creatures roam about on the Ethernet, and occasionally Prime Material, plane trying to make up for the tragic loss others may feel. Apologizers never strike first, but when they do their first attack is always to kick themselves. If successful, they get an automatic Disarm attempt against their opponent. Disarmed opponents are then subject to a hug. This hug requires a Will save (DC 18) or the opponent is Charmed.

Silly I know, but it is Friday and I wanted to lighten things up a little

 

[Ourph]

I just think dishonestly apologizing (we KNOW they're not sorry--they think this is the right way to go) would just make things worse.

I said....

The apology should have been offered in the announcement. Something along the lines of....

"We know many of our customers are long time fans and subscribers of these publications. To those of you who will be disappointed, inconvenienced or saddened by this decision we offer our heartfelt apologies.

What is dishonest about WotC saying "We are sorry you are disappointed."?

If I miss my friend's birthday party because my mom is in the hospital, I go to that friend and apologize. I say, "I'm sorry I missed your birthday party. My mom was in the hospital." That doesn't in any way imply that I mean "I'm sorry I missed your birthday party. My mom was in the hospital. It was a mistake to choose my sick mom over your birthday party.". I made the right decision, but I'm still sorry that I disappointed my friend on his birthday.

 

[Vigilance]

I don't get how people don't see the simple logic of this.

Because you're being emotional and not logical, and because it isn't that simple?

Maybe Wizards realized that competing with Paizo for eyes on this sort of content would be bad for BOTH companies.

Sometimes things have to go away. Sometimes cutting the cord is the best solution.

Having both the magazines and the web content, imo, wouldn't have been fair to Paizo or Wizards.

But Wizards primary responsibility is to THEMSELVES.

It sounds like they went out of their way to be courteous to Paizo, while still executing the decision they felt best for their company.

But they did a lot of things for Paizo they didnt have to, such as allowing them to finish the Savage Tide AP. Even the timing of the announcement was to benefit Paizo, allowing them to notify retailers before GAMA.

 

[Ourph]

Imagine this MicroSoft announcement: "We're saddened to announce that we will no longer be making Windows XP. Instead we're offering Windows Vista. We apologize to those Windows XP users who will be disappointed by this move."

I would be delighted, as a Microsoft user, to see such an announcement. It wouldn't change how I felt about Vista vs. XP, but it would certainly make me think the person handling the PR for the announcement was a real hoopy frood who knew where his towel was.

 

[Enforcer]

I said....


What is dishonest about WotC saying "We are sorry you are disappointed."?

If I miss my friend's birthday party because my mom is in the hospital, I go to that friend and apologize. I say, "I'm sorry I missed your birthday party. My mom was in the hospital." That doesn't in any way imply that I mean "I'm sorry I missed your birthday party. My mom was in the hospital. It was a mistake to choose my sick mom over your birthday party.". I made the right decision, but I'm still sorry that I disappointed my friend on his birthday.

The comparision you make is hardly appropriate--not visiting a friend because your mom is sick is a little different from switching from magazines to online content! A better comparision would be "sorry I missed your party, but for your birthday I bought you something I think you'll really love!" And even then the comparison is off--WotC isn't sorry they're canceling the magazines, period. There's no reason to apologize.

And it still implies lack of confidence in the product and continues to dwell on the past rather than the new and shiny goodness. So it's dishonest because WotC is confident in the DI, and would rather focus on the DI than what's been done.

 

[Ourph]

WotC isn't sorry they're canceling the magazines, period. There's no reason to apologize.

Are you purposely ignoring what I'm typing? I have written (several times now) that the apology is NOT....

"We are sorry we cancelled the magazines."

The apology is...

"We are sorry our decision has disappointed you."

There is a world of difference and the latter absolutely does not imply any lack of confidence with their choice.

My analogy was spot on.

 

[Enforcer]

Except again, it focuses on the negative rather than the positive. It's a poor business decision--the people demanding an apology aren't gonna switch anyways, and as said above, those on the fence certainly don't need a reason not to switch.

And if you want to get really cynical (or rational, depending on what you want to call it), they don't care that you're disappointed if you're not going to switch. They get nothing from apologizing, so why bother?

 

[Bayushi Seikuro]

Just my two cents again.

I am glad that it seems, for the most part, the flames and fire are dying down.

Doesn't make the sense of loss less, for some.

Here's my thoughts, though.

Let's hope, for better or worse, this will work, and that there will be print things again. It's highly unlikely. As a friend pointed out, once people realized that collectible card games could be nearly pure profit, it seems a game of every kind was available. So, wood/paper/cardstock became more expensive.

Maybe if there hadn't been such a TCG glut paper stock wouldn't be as 'unfeasible' to accountants. Or maybe if there hadn't been a gold-rush mentality when the OGL came out - where there seemed to be so many ... well, not as high quality products as there remains now... maybe if that rush hadn't happened, it (cancelling Dragon) wouldn't have been seen as a either-or situation.

I do agree that a decent amount of lead-up with less emotional words would have done wonders. Yes, saying 'D&D moving to next step in evolution!' is much more positive and less prone to cause emotional reactions than 'Paizo to lose liscense to print Dungeon/Dragon mags'.

One thing I've learned in retail and sales is to play with positives. If someone comes in to look at products, and they say they're unlikely to buy because they always buy from XYZ store, but they thought they'd give you a chance, you don't bash XYZ store. It's their favorite, any slight would seem a personal attack almost on their opinion. You start by commenting on positive things they do, and how those are services you also offer, but then you slide into the sales pitch.

If I were to have to pitch DI - not knowing anything about it now, but assuming I knew more - I'd be sure that I made it clear that I've always loved Dragon magazine - which is true; although not a subscriber, I pick up the various issues that interest me. My pitch would compare what Dragon offers that DI will also offer, and then go into what it will also offer in addition -- let's say, like, weekly updates compiled into a monthly digest form.

My two cents boil down to the fact that Dragon/Dungeon need to be more profitable or also help build the community.

I do not feel, in my opinion, that Dragon has, over the past few years I've been on enworld, been competing with 3rd party material. It's been competing with the people I've met on ENworld. People who, for free, will give me opinions and discussions and relatively real-time updates or material for my game.

To me, a paper magazine, as awesome as it is, and how much I love it, cannot offer that.

Okay, nuff rambling. I am glad people have said their peace and that it seems to be settling down a bit.

 

[DonTadow]

An apology from a company is a business decision. Companies don't have emotions, they have profit margins. If they came on and apologized some of you would still want blood.

Hasrbo/wotc hasn't hireda bunch of idiots. There's a plan, it sounds good. Id rather they move foward and not waste time appeasing people whom have a false sense of ownership of a product they've only invested a few dollars in.

 

[loki44]

I admit I haven't read this entire thread and I'm still wading through threads of a similar sort here and on other forums. Having said that, c'mon people. My first subscription to The Dragon started back in the early 80's. I let it lapse a bit in the mid-late 90's but picked it up again with the advent of 3.0 and the OGL. There were several major changes along the way. I was not, and am not, a fan of many of those changes but I still found enough that I liked about the mags to keep buying them even though I knew I'd never use 99% of the stuff. That was my decision. Nobody owed me anything. I never felt any animosity towards any publishers or companies because of changes they made. I'll continue with the digital mode of the product for just the same reason.

An apology though? Give me a freakin break. Either you buy into it or you don't. These people are running a business and they don't owe anyone anything. I'm willing to bet that the majority of you clamoring for an apology and a boycott will be sucked right back into the new system soon enough. All this passing judgement stuff without basing your opinions on much empirical information rings very hollow for me. See ya in digital Dungeon & Dragon land mateys.