WotC Replies: Statements by WotC employees regarding Dragon/Dungeon going online

[Olaf the Stout]

This just came across as hollow spin and damage control to me. I'm betting they didn't expect such a negative response to their decision. To try and combat this and get some credibility on the decision they got people who worked on the magazines to say how much they are looking forward to the new digital initiative.

Sorry, it didn't work on me. You'll have to try much harder than that.

The comments from Scott Rouse said it all for me.

Olaf the Stout

 

[el-remmen]

Hey everybody,

I know this issue is bringing up a lot of emotions, but let's keep the rules of civility and respect in mind when posting.

My recommendation? Do what I do, hit the preview button, wait a few minutes and then re-read what you wrote - if it still seems okay then submit.

Thanks

El-Mod

 

[mrswing]

Corporate spin at its least subtle. As a prelude to moneygrabbing at its most
'Boy, wait till you see what's coming! You'll be overjoyed we trashed those two rag... uh, beloved classics of the D&D scene'. Yeah, right.
No matter what is coming, there was no reason to stop Dragon and Dungeon. No reason both media couldn't co-exist peaceably. But apparently Hasbro/WOTC is reasoning that every penny that goes to Paizo is a penny stolen from them.
Compare the current reaction to the reaction when Imagine (TSR UK's fairly rebellious magazine) was shut down for corporate reasons. The staff was furious, and let it be known. Ah, the good old days...

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Hmmm, for a minute there I was thinking that maybe WotC knew they were uncanning a pandora's box by cancelling the magazines and that's why they released the announcement on a Friday. As someone else pointed out, that's when government releases bad news b/c the public pay far less attention on the weekend.

That being said, I'm not so sure that the same is true for gamers. It's quite possible that more people will be available online over the weekend than during the week, potentially setting up quite the powderkeg of negativity.

It would be interesting to know if EN World is busier on the weekend than during the week...

 

[pedr]

Two thoughts:

Firstly I think I remember rumours or confirmation when Dungeon and Dragon were first licensed out to Paizo (which, I think, was created precisely so that Wizards had a company to license the magazines to!) part of the reason was that Hasbro sees itself as a games company, and doesn't do magazines. They didn't understand them, didn't do them in any other division and didn't really want to be doing them in the roleplaying division, or whatever Wizards is considered. So it might well be that Wizards is not permitted to publish print magazines like Dungeon and Dragon. Given that Paizo continuing to do so would be in competition with some of the content of the DI, it makes sense to end the print magazines for good.

Secondly, what I found most interesting was the comment of Matthew Sernett in the 'Reflections' article:

True, paper issues won’t litter the floors of future game designers, but their contents, after having been on the periphery for so long, will once again be brought into the fold and become an integral part of the future of the D&D game.

I think what he's saying here is that for a whole host of reasons, Dragon material isn't really considered to be D&D material. If Wizards writes up a feat or spell or class in a book, people consider it to be D&D material. They might decide to use it, or not use it, but it's considered 'official'. Despite '100% official material', I don't think the same is true for the material in Dragon. It is certainly not used by Wizards as 'official' material - it doesn't show up and inform later products the way that spells from SpC or feats from Complete Arcane do. By bringing this kind of content back in house, it suggests a far closer link between D&D R&D and the material used - and quite possibly a two-way relationship between the material you get as part of this subscription and the future direction of the D&D game.

Perhaps ...! I ought to say, I'm pretty neutral on the issue, having only occasionally bought Dragon, and never Dungeon. I agree that Paizo have done the PR superbly well, however - well enough to convince me to subscribe to Pathfinder!

 

[delericho]

It is certainly not used by Wizards as 'official' material - it doesn't show up and inform later products the way that spells from SpC or feats from Complete Arcane do.

Except, of course, for those spells from Dragon that did make it into the Spell Compendium and the magic items that made it into the Magic Item Compendium. There was also material in Complete Psionic that originally appeared in Dragon, and I'm pretty sure there have been other bits and pieces that have appeared at various times.

I will agree, however, that material from Dragon is allowed in campaigns far less often than other 'official' material.

 

[Ghendar]

Do we have to get THAT overly dramatic about a collection of paper?

But I am supposed to get all excited about e-content in place of paper?
This is a highly dramatic event to a lot of us. Why is it so hard for some to understand that?

 

[Ghendar]

they would love a e-zine by wizards... in addition to the Magazines.

Yes, exactly. (although maybe "love" is a bit too strong)
And if this were the case then I highly doubt we would be seeing this level of outrage.

 

[Ghendar]

Nope, I just want answers.

I want a paper magazine.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

But I am supposed to get all excited about e-content in place of paper?
This is a highly dramatic event to a lot of us. Why is it so hard for some to understand that?

Ahh, but I didn't say you had to get excited about anything.

And the end of a magazine may be a dramatic event for some, but if its anywhere near the moaning, groaning, and comparisons to the death of real people, well...maybe a lot of people in this hobby have their priorities way off.

I loved Dragon and Dungeon, and have bought them for years...but they are just magazines. And like it or not, nothing lives forever, either.