Wil Wheaton Drops Dungeon Column

[Mark]

Also known as the Vimes Theory of Boots.
A poor man spends 10 Ankh-Morpork Dollars on a pair of shoddy boots. They last him a year, then he has to buy new boots.
A rich man spends 50 Ankh-Morpork Dollars on a pair of really good boots. They last a decade or two.

Good stuff, that Pratchett.

Wish we could get Erik to comment on this (or did I miss it?)

I like the idea of high profile celebrities writing a column in the magazine but I think it would be better if it were a different celebrity each issue. There must a many of them that game now or remember their gaming days with enough fondness to have a good story or two in them.

 

[Simplicity]

A lot of the obsessive fan's are probably also completionist's that want to buy ever product for their favorite game lines, so I can see where the opinion comes from.

No way to tell though, since I doubt they'd check the "are you insane" box on any survey.

Hey, I wouldn't mind every product from my favorite game lines... Does that make me insane? Does it? DOES IT?!?!?!!?!

 

[JediSoth]

Just thought I'd throw in my two cents...

I started buying Dungeon regularly with the new format change. I had bought issues periodically over the years (when it looked like there was an interesting adventure in them) and have been getting Dragon since issue 124, but I'd never subscribed to Dungeon. Wil Save was never first on my read list (I tend to go through all magazines front to back, regardless of content), but I did always read it. Gaming has some stigmas attached to it, and it's always nice when someone in the public eye admits to being a gamer. I'm sorry to see the column go. I was always one of the people who didn't really care for the character of Wesley Crusher, but as I got to "know" Wil Wheaton through his other work, I grew to respect that man.

I like what Erik has done with Dungeon. I'll admit, I've never used an adventure from Dungeon, but it's not for lack of quality. It's just never worked out for my D&D games that way. I'm sure he'll find something worthwhile to put in that space; if nothing else, there are a lot of us writers out there looking for publication.

JediSoth

 

[ColonelHardisson]

A lot of the obsessive fan's are probably also completionist's that want to buy ever product for their favorite game lines, so I can see where the opinion comes from.

Plus, those who continually rail about how this or that game company puts out material that gamers "have" to buy are also this kind of fan. You know, the ones who complain about all the stuff TSR or WotC put out/puts out which this kind of fan feels "has" to be used in their game. It sorta seems like shifting the blame for one's OCD onto someone else.

 

[DaveMage]

I spent a good bit of time going through that Paizo thread today.

How appalling.

If those are the people that form the backbone of the D&D industry than I'm embarrassed to be a gamer.

I sure hope you are wrong about that, Erik.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Also known as the Vimes Theory of Boots.
A poor man spends 10 Ankh-Morpork Dollars on a pair of shoddy boots. They last him a year, then he has to buy new boots.
A rich man spends 50 Ankh-Morpork Dollars on a pair of really good boots. They last a decade or two.

I don't know about that, but what I do know is that a magazine isn't really a necessity like boots. Some may want to check out the magazine on the stands before buying it, and have the freedom to not buy if they want to. It could well be that some don't really expect to buy Dungeon every month, but are won over after a look at it on the stands. I know I don't buy every issue of Dungeon, so getting a subscription isn't really all that attractive to me.

 

[GravyFingerz]

A lot of the obsessive fan's are probably also completionist's that want to buy ever product for their favorite game lines, so I can see where the opinion comes from.

No way to tell though, since I doubt they'd check the "are you insane" box on any survey.

I am a completionist, and by all means am not obsessive. In fact, I used to have a friend who would get mad because I didn't allow certain books and stuff, even though I owned all the WotC books at the time. I don't believe everything should be allowed, and he did.

But, cest la vie.

EDIT: I just wanted to reply to this thread, since I axed several of my own comments before I put this one forth. They all involved disappointment and disgust. Better to be positive.

Fluffy kitties!

 

[DonTadow]

Let me be clear.

I don't think that ornery gamers are the bulk of gamers, by any stretch of the imagination. As you said, I think most gamers are "average" folks with "average" lives, to whom D&D is just a diversion.

However, I think that ornery gamers make up a significant chunk of the "active" base of roleplayers, the ones who subscribe to magazines, post online, etc.

Again, these folks don't represent a majority of this "active" base, but there are enough of them that they help to keep the hobby alive, and cannot be jettisoned simply because they have inconvenient opinions. Without them, I'm not certain that the industry would be a success, or even viable.

Thus, I suspect they may form the "backbone" of support for the hobby.

But that's just a suspicion, and I'm not married to it.

--Erik

I'd take a different opinion on this despite the fact that I completely agree with the logic. I think these ornery stubborn gamers are the reason that some areas of the game has remained stagnent. YOu must admit, and I remember reading the editorials, that it was these gamers whom had the biggest grouch when it came to the revisions in Dungeon and Dragon magazine. Both magazines reach out to a broader audience now. I should know I was one of them. I had seen Dragon magazine the previous year that I subscribed and it was so packed and written for the die hardest that I shied away. But as you said, the majority of gamers are the ordinary ones. When I picked it up last year, I was awed and surprised by the ease of presentation and the variety of material. By ignoring the diehardest minority you produced a product that picked up a broader appeal. IN the end even most of the diehardest admitted the changes were good.

When we do headlines in the paper, we are not catering to the die hard newspaper reader. Those guys will pick up the paper every morning regarduless. They'll launch complaints about content and presentation, but in the end they will buy it. We want to attract the people whom don't pick it up everyday. The minority diehardest will always buy the product, but the product will not strive unless the material can appeal on a broader appeal. Look at the New York Times Color Photos now and even the Wall Street Journal bends a bit on their front page. If most of them had their way, we'd never progress.

If the diehard onery stubborn people had their way, we'd be playing by first edition rules and the popularity of d and d would have been just a cult hobby among these people. Soon the game would have went the way of the army men figures and sports card collectors. But d and d is too good to stay a cult hobbiest business. And by ignoring the minority it has blossomed these last few years with d20, anti d20 and all there is between.

 

[Felon]

So, no more wistful remembrance from Wil. Wow, what a loss. We'll just have to find a way to get on with our lives.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Maybe I should write the column then. So you can read all about relevant D&D.

Dungeons & Dragons [current edition] is the one true game. All previous editions were just attempts to achieve this level of excellence.

Quasqueton

OD&D is the fertilizer that the current game grew upon.

And we all know what fertilizer is, don't we?

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* I really hoped that he would eventually get a game or three in with his stepkids.